Erosion and abrasion of tooth-colored restorative materials and human enamel

Objectives

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of erosion and toothbrush abrasion on different restorative materials and human enamel.

Methods

Human enamel and 5 kinds of tooth-colored restorative materials were used. The restorative materials included three composite resins (Filtek Silorane, Tetric EvoCeram, and Tetric EvoFlow), a polyacid-modified composite (Dyract Extra), and a conventional glass-ionomer cement (Ketac Fil Plus). For each type of the material, 40 specimens were prepared and embedded in ceramic moulds and divided into four groups (n = 10): control group (C), erosion group (E), abrasion group (A), and erosion–abrasion group (EA). The specimens were subjected to six daily erosive attacks (groups E and EA; citric acid, pH 2.3, 1 min) and/or six abrasive attacks (groups A and EA; toothbrush abrasion, 100 strokes, 1 min), while the control specimens (group C) were maintained in artificial saliva. After 10-day treatment, the substance loss and surface changes were determined by surface profilometry and scanning electron microscopy.

Results

Human enamel presented higher substance loss when compared to restorative materials. Generally, combined erosion–abrasion (EA) caused the highest substance loss, followed by erosion, abrasion, and storage in artificial saliva. Composite resin presented highest durability under erosive and/or abrasive attacks. Enamel and restorative materials showed degradation in groups E and EA through SEM observation.

Conclusions

Toothbrush abrasion has a synergistic effect with erosion on substance loss of human enamel, polyacid-modified composite and glass-ionomer cement. The acid- and abrasive-resistance of human enamel was lower compared to restorative materials.     

Effect of fluoride-releasing restorative materials on bacteria-induced pH fall at the bacteria–material interface: An in vitro model study

Objectives

Inhibition of bacterial acid production by dental restorative materials is one of the strategies for secondary caries prevention. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of fluoride-releasing restorative materials on bacteria-induced pH fall at the bacteria–material interface.

Methods

Four fluoride-releasing restorative materials, glass-ionomer cement (GIC), resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC), resin composite (RC) and flowable resin composite (FRC) were used. Each specimen was immersed in potassium phosphate buffer at pH 7.0 for 10 min and 4 weeks, and in potassium acetate buffer at pH 5.5 for 4 weeks. An experimental apparatus was made of polymethyl methacrylate and had a well with restorative materials or polymethyl methacrylate (control) at the bottom. The well was packed with cells of Streptococcus mutans, and the pH at the interface between cells and materials was monitored using a miniature pH electrode after the addition of 1% glucose for 90 min, and the fluoride released into the well was quantified using a fluoride ion electrode.

Results

The pH of GIC (4.98–5.18), RMGIC (4.77–4.99), RC (4.62–4.75) and FRC (4.54–4.84) at 90 min were higher than that of control (4.31–4.49). The fluoride amounts released from GIC were the highest, followed by RMGIC, RC and FRC, irrespective of immersion conditions. Saliva coating on materials had no significant effect.

Conclusions

The fluoride-releasing restorative materials inhibited pH fall at the bacteria–material interface. The degree of inhibition of pH fall seemed to correspond to the amount of fluoride detected, suggesting that the inhibition was due to the fluoride released from these materials.

Clinical significance

A little amount of fluoride actually released from the fluoride-releasing materials may have caries preventive potential for oral bacteria.     

Fluoride release from a new glass-ionomer cement

This study compared the amount and pattern of fluoride release from a new glass-ionomer-based material (nano-ionomer) with other restorative materials and correlated the surface area to volume of nano-sized filler with its capacity to release fluoride in the powder, more quickly increasing the fluoride. The materials evaluated were a nano-ionomer (Ketac N 100), a conventional glass-ionomer cement (GC Fuji II), a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (GC Fuji II LC), a compomer (Dyract F) and a fluoride-releasing resin composite (Tetric N Flow). A resin composite (Synergy Flow) served as the control. Ten specimens were fabricated from each of these materials using a customized metal mold. The fluoride release was measured every 24 hours for the first seven days, and on days 14, 21 and 28, a combination fluoride ion—selective electrode connected to an ion analyzer. The data was analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD test (p=0.05). An initial fluoride “burst effect” was seen with all of the materials, except for the control and compomer. The conventional glass-ionomer cement showed the highest fluoride release on the first three days. The nano-ionomer showed the maximum release of fluoride for the remaining days. A low constant level of fluoride release was seen from the compomer and fluoride-releasing resin composite throughout the study period.     

Mineralization in bovine dentin adjacent to glass-ionomer restorations

OBJECTIVES: To assess the uptake of fluoride as well as the increase in mineralization by bovine dentin after restoring an experimentally made cavity with conventional glass-ionomer cement or a polyacid resin composite. METHODS: Cylindrical cavities were prepared on the labial root surfaces in bovine dentin. The cavities were restored with the test material. The restored teeth were individually suspended in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 30 days. The teeth were sectioned and the superficial dentin cavity walls were analyzed for fluoride, calcium, and phosphorus by an EPMA device. The effects of the different fluoride-releasing materials on the hardness of the dentin were determined by indentation (20-microm intervals below the filled surface into the underlying sound dentin from the surface to a depth of 100microm). RESULTS: Conventional glass-ionomer cement had a significant effect on fluoride uptake. In addition, the calcium and phosphorus scan revealed the elevation of calcium and phosphorus levels in a deeper zone corresponding to the locations of the fluoride uptake at the surface of axial wall. However, the polyacid resin composite did not exhibit a zone of calcium and phosphorus elevation. The average dentin hardness under conventional glass-ionomer cement in the studied five distances ranged from 84.3 to 61.3KHN, however, that of the polyacid resin composite ranged from 62.5 to 64.9KHN. Analysis of variance for these data demonstrated a significant difference in hardness between the 20-microm depth and the other depths (P<0.01, ANOVA Fisher's PSLD). CONCLUSION: The present paper indicates that the fluoride penetrated deeper into the dentin with conventional glass-ionomer cement than the polyacid resin composite. Conventional glass-ionomer cement had a significant effect on fluoride uptake. In addition, hypermineralization occurred within the superficial dentin cavity wall region of conventional glass-ionomer cement.     

Storage of polyacid-modified resin composites (“compomers”) in lactic acid solution

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the interaction of four polyacid-modified resin composites with aqueous lactic acid solutions, and to compare changes with those for a glass-ionomer cement and a conventional resin composite. METHODS: For each material, namely Compoglass F, Dyract AP, Hytac and Ana Compomer, plus AquaCem (glass-ionomer cement) and Pekafil (conventional composite resin), five cylindrical specimens of 4 mm diameter x 6 mm height were prepared and weighed. They were stored individually in 2.0 cm3 of 0.02 mol l-1 lactic acid solution for 1 week then the pH was determined and the specimens reweighed. The lactic acid solution was replenished, and the specimens were stored for a further week, after which the pH and specimen weights were again measured. This was repeated at 1 week intervals until the specimens were 6 weeks old. Differences were analysed by ANOVA followed by Newman-Keuls post hoc analysis. RESULTS: All four polyacid-modified composites increased the pH of the solutions at all time intervals by at least 0.26 pH units (significant to at least p < 0.01). This effect was similar to that of the glass-ionomer (but significantly less, p < 0.05) while significantly greater (p < 0.05) than that for the composite, Pekafil, which, by contrast, had no effect on pH. The observed rise in pH reduced significantly over time (ANOVA, p < 0.05). After 1 week, all pH changes were accompanied by net reductions in specimen mass, indicating susceptibility to acid erosion. Hytac was significantly more resistant to this erosion than the other materials; conversely, it had the least effect on solution pH. SIGNIFICANCE: These results show that polyacid-modified resin composites neutralise lactic acid in vitro but suffer erosion in the process.     

Fluoride release and uptake characteristics of aesthetic restorative materials

The aims of this study were firstly to investigate the fluoride-releasing characteristics of two composite resins (Tetric and Valux Plus), two polyacid-modified resin composites (Compoglass and Dyract), and conventional glass-ionomer cement (Ceramfil beta). The second aim was to assess the fluoride uptake and subsequent release from the same range of materials. Fifteen discs (6 mm diameter and 1.5 mm height) were prepared for each material. Each disc was immersed in 4 ML of deionized water within a plastic vial. The release of fluoride was measured daily at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 15, 30 and 60 days. After daily fluoride release was measured for 60 days, samples were refluoridated in 1000-ppm sodium fluoride (NaF) solutions (pH 6.6) for 10 min and fluoride release was measured daily for a total of 5 days. The release of fluoride from aesthetic restorative materials was measured by using specific fluoride electrode and an ionanalyser. Results were statistically analysed by two-way repeated measure ANOVA and Duncan's multiple range test. The results revealed that all fluoride-containing materials (Ceramfil beta, Compoglass, Dyract, Tetric) released fluoride initially and the release was greatest at the first day. At any time during the test period Ceramfil beta released the most and Valux Plus did not release any detectable fluoride (P < 0.01). Sample exposures to 1000 ppm NaF solution increased the 24-h fluoride release from all fluoride-containing materials. This difference lasted only 24-48 h after exposure. Ceramfil beta had a tendency to recharge not seen with the other materials (P < 0.05).     

Effect of erosive pH cycling on different restorative materials and on enamel restored with these materials

This in vitro study evaluated the effect of erosive pH cycling on the percentage of surface micro-hardness change (%SMHC) and wear of different restorative materials and bovine enamel restored with these materials. Eighty enamel specimens were randomly divided into eight groups according to the restorative materials and immersion media used: GI/GV-resin-modified glass-ionomer, GII/GVI-conventional glass-ionomer, GIII/GVII-resin composite and GIV/GVIII-amalgam. Over a period of seven days, groups GI to GIV were immersed in a cola drink (ERO) for 5 minutes, 3x/day and kept in artificial saliva between erosive cycles. Groups GV to GVIII were immersed in artificial saliva (SAL) throughout the entire experimental period (control). Data were tested for significant differences using ANOVA and Tukey's tests (p<0.05). For %SMHC, considering the restorative materials, no significant differences were detected among the materials and immersion media. Mean wear was higher for the resin modified glass ionomer cement when compared to conventional cement, but those materials did not significantly differ from the others. For enamel analyses, erosive pH cycling promoted higher wear and %SMHC compared to saliva. There were no significant differences in wear and %SMHC of enamel around the different restorative materials, regardless of the distance from the restorative material (50, 150 or 300 microm). In conclusion, there were only subtle differences among the materials, and these differences were not able to protect the surrounding enamel from erosion.     

The effect of bleaching agents on the microhardness of dental aesthetic restorative materials

This study investigated the effects of three home bleaching agents on the microhardness of various dental aesthetic restorative materials. The restorative materials were: feldspatic porcelain, microfilled composite resin and light-cured modified glass-ionomer cement and the bleaching agents Nite-White (16% carbamide peroxide), Opalescence (10% carbamide peroxide and carbapol jel) and Rembrandt (10% carbamide peroxide jel). A total of 90 restorative material samples were prepared 1 cm diameter and 6 mm thick and kept in distilled water for 24 h before commencing bleaching which was carried out for 8 h day-1 for 4 weeks. Microhardness measurements were then made using a Tukon tester. Statistically significant differences with respect to unbleached controls were found only for the feldspatic porcelain and microfilled composite resins (P <0.05) for Nite-White and Opalescence. All the bleaching agents decreased the microhardness of the porcelain and increased that of the light cured modified glass-ionomer cement. For the composite resin, whereas Nite-White increased its microhardness, the other bleaching agents decreased it. There were no significant differences between the bleaching agents for any of the restorative materials.     

Inhibition of demineralization in vitro around fluoride releasing materials

Replacement of restorations because of secondary caries is a continuing problem in restorative dentistry. This investigation assessed the capacity of fluoride-releasing restorative materials to resist caries in vitro when used in roots. Class 5 cavities were prepared in buccal and lingual surfaces of 30 extracted premolars and restored with one of three polyacid modified resin composites (F-2000, Hytac and Compoglass F), a resin modified glass-ionomer cement (Fuji II LC) a conventional glass ionomer (Ketac-Fil), and a resin composite (Z-100). After 5 weeks in an acid gel for caries-like lesion formation, the teeth were sectioned longitudinally and examined with polarized light. The results showed that restoration of caries with polyacid modified resin composites and resin modified glass ionomer cements may be of great importance in the prevention of secondary caries around the restorations in roots. Clinical Relevance Light cured fluoride-releasing restorations may inhibit caries-like lesions. Inhibition of demineralization in vitro around fluoride releasing materials.     

Shear bond strength of six restorative materials

The purpose of this study was to determine and compare the shear bond strength of a conventional glass-ionomer cement, a resin modified glass-ionomer, a composite resin and three compomer restorative materials. Dentin of the occlusal surfaces from sixty extracted human permanent molars were prepared for shear bond strength testing. The specimens were randomly divided into six groups of 10 each. Dentinal surfaces were treated according to the instructions of manufacturers for each material. Each restorative material was placed inside nylon cylinders 2 mm high with an internal diameter of 3 mm, which were placed perpendicular to dentin surfaces. Shear bond strengths were determined using an Universal Testing Machine at crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min in a compression mode. Conventional glass-ionomer, Ketac-Molar aplicap showed the lowest mean shear bond strength 3.77+/-1.76 (X +/- SD MPa) and the composite resin, Heliomolar showed the highest mean shear bond strength 16.54+/-1.65 while the mean bond strength of Fuji II LC was 9.55+/-1.06. The shear bond strengths of compomer restorative materials were 12.83+/-1.42, 10.64+/-1.42 and 11.19+/-1.19 for Compoglass, Hytac and Dyract respectively. ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences in the mean shear bond strengths of all groups (P<0.001). No statistically significant difference was found between the three compomer materials (P>0.5). Ketac-Molar and composite resin showed statistically significant difference (P<0.0005). The mode of fracture varied between materials. It is concluded that the compomer restorative materials show higher shear bond strength than conventional glass-ionomer and resin modified glass-ionomer, but less than composite resin. The fracture mode is not related to the shear bond strengths values.     

In vitro evaluation of fluoride-releasing restorative materials for sealing the root canals of overdenture abutments

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of newer fluoride-releasing restorative materials to protect the root surface from acid attack. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The materials used were glass-ionomer cement (GIC), resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RM-GIC), and a compomer (Comp). A composite resin (CR) was used as the control. The restored teeth were stored in deionized, distilled water for 14 days and subjected to 300 thermocycles (55 degrees C and 5 degrees C). The teeth were cycled in a demineralizing solution (pH 5.0 or 4.0) for 6 hours and in a remineralizing solution (pH 7.0) for 17 hours for 10 days. The depths of lesions created by acid challenge were measured at the interface of the tooth and the restorative material and then at a distance of 50, 100, and 300 microns from the tooth-restoration margin using polarized light microscopy and contact microradiography. RESULTS: At pH 4.0, there was significant difference in the depth at the interface between the tooth and the restorative material (P < .001). The GIC and RM-GIC were protective, and the lesion depths were significantly shallower than for Comp or CR. The protective effect varied depending on the distance from the interface of the tooth and the restorative material. At pH 5.0, the GIC and RM-GIC had no lesions at the interface, while the Comp and the CR had lesions (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Fluoride-releasing glass-ionomer cement seems to be an appropriate material to seal the root canals of overdenture abutments, because it has an inhibiting effect on demineralization at the cavity wall in vitro.     

Protective effect of resin coating on the microleakage of Class V restorations following treatment with carbamide peroxide in vitro

This in vitro study evaluated the effects of a resin coating on the microleakage of Class V restorations due to bleaching. One-hundred and sixty Class V cavities were randomly restored with one of four different restorative materials (n = 40): a compomer (Dyract AP), a conventional glass-ionomer cement (Ketac Molar Easymix), a resin modified glass-ionomer cement (Fuji II LC) and a resin composite (Filtek Z350). For each kind of material, 40 restorations were divided into four subgroups: bleached with resin coating (group BC), bleached without resin coating (group B), immersed in artificial saliva with resin coating (group SC), immersed in artificial saliva without resin coating (group S). In groups B and BC, the specimens were bleached with 10% carbamide peroxide gel for eight hours daily, while groups SC and S were stored in artificial saliva instead. After 28-day treatment, all the samples were subjected to a dye penetration test using the multiple-sectioning technique. In addition, one more test was performed to investigate the color difference between the coated and uncoated tooth surface after bleaching. There was a statistically significant increase in cervical microleakage in the group B specimens of Fuji II LC and Ketac Molar Easymix compared to their respective control specimen (group S). These effects on microleakage were not found in the bleached specimens with resin coating (group BC). There was also no visually-detectable color difference between the coated and uncoated tooth surface. In conclusion, resin coating is an effective method for avoiding the bleaching-induced microleakage of glass-ionomer cement.     

In vitro push-out strength of seven luting agents to dentin

PURPOSE: New luting agents, described as resin-modified glass-ionomer cements and compomers, have been developed during the last decade to improve the retention of cemented restorations. The aims of this study were to (1) compare the push-out strength of these new luting materials against both conventional cements and bonding luting agents, and (2) evaluate the influence of dentin surface treatment on both glass-ionomer cement and 4-META adhesive resin push-out strength. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Conical standardized cavities were drilled in the center of coronal dentin disks. Ninety sandblasted Ni-Cr inlays, divided into nine batches, were luted into the cavities according to the surface treatment and the nature of the following luting agents: zinc phosphate cement, zinc polycarboxylate cement, type 1 glass-ionomer +/- polyacrylic acid, resin-modified glass-ionomer, polyacid-modified composite resin, filled bis-GMA phosphate ester resin, and 4-META adhesive resin +/- application of activated monomer. Each specimen was placed in a holding device, and a steel rod was used to apply a force on the inlay until rupture occurred. The push-out strength was calculated, and the failure mode was controlled. RESULTS: There were significant differences between some of the groups. The highest push-out strength was achieved by the 4-META adhesive resin after application of activated monomer. The lowest value was attained with zinc phosphate and polycarboxylate cements. CONCLUSION: Both resin-modified glass-ionomer and polyacid-modified composite resin luting materials exhibited a push-out strength similar to resin-based materials. Specific dentin surface treatments significantly enhanced the push-out strengths of glass-ionomer cement and 4-META adhesive resin.     

Fluoride release from a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement in a continuous-flow system. Effect of pH

Fluoride is added to many dental restorative materials, including glass-ionomer cements, for the specific purpose of leaching fluoride into the surrounding tissues to provide secondary caries inhibition. During the caries process, an acidic environment attacks the dental tissues as well as the glass-ionomer cement. We hypothesized that pH significantly affects the rate of release of fluoride from the glass-ionomer cement. A continuous-flow fluoride-measuring system that monitors the amount of fluoride released over time was used to determine the release of fluoride from a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (KetacFil). The results show that the release rate began with a fast burst of fluoride which quickly diminished to low levels in 3 days. Under neutral pH conditions, the rate of fluoride release at 72 hrs was significantly slower than at pH 4.     

Artificial formed caries-like lesions around esthetic restorative materials

Dental restorations fail for a variety of reasons. Secondary caries is one of the primary causes of failure of dental restorations. One method for reducing frequency and severity of this problem is the use of fluoride containing restorative materials. The ability of a material to inhibit secondary caries formation is an important clinical therapeutic property. This investigation assessed the capacity of esthetic restorative materials to resist caries in vitro. Class V cavities were prepared in buccal and lingual surfaces of 50 extracted sound third molars. The occlusal and gingival cavosurface margin of each preparation was on enamel surface. The five materials were used: Conventional glass ionomer cement Ceramfil beta (PSP), two polyacid modified resin composites Compoglass (Vivadent) and Dyract (Dentsply/DeTrey), non fluoride releasing composite resin Valux Plus (3M) and fluoride releasing composite resin Tetric (Vivadent). After 10 weeks in an acid gel for caries-like lesion formation, the teeth were sectioned occluso-gingivally through the middle of the restorations and examined by polarized light microscopy, while immersed in water. The statistical analysis of the results showed that secondary caries initiation and progression might be reduced significantly when fluoride-containing materials were placed. The conventional glass ionomer cement (Ceramfil beta) provided the highest protection against caries attack and the non-fluoride releasing composite resin (Valux Plus) restoration provided the least (p<0.05).     

Fluoride recharge of aesthetic dental materials

The objective of the study was to compare the potential for fluoride recharge of two glass-ionomer cements, a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement, a compomer and a fluoride-containing composite in artificial saliva. Disc samples of each of the materials were placed into artificial saliva. The fluoride content of the artificial saliva was determined at various intervals up to 57 days. The discs were subjected to a 2 min exposure of NaF (500 parts/106). This recharge procedure was repeated at 64 and 120 days. The fluoride release was measured before and after recharge. The fluoride release for all of the materials increased after each exposure to NaF; however, the amount for the composite was very low. The resin-modified glass-ionomer cement displayed the greatest potential for fluoride recharge at 57 and 64 days (P<0.05). By 120 days, the amount of fluoride released in the 24 h post-recharge interval had decreased in all the materials. All the materials showed a potential for fluoride recharge. This effect, however, was minimal in the fluoride-containing composite.     

Fluoride release/uptake of polyacid-modified resin composites (compomers) in neutral and acidic buffer solutions

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the fluoride uptake/release of polyacid-modified resin composites (compomers) in neutral and acidic buffer solutions. Two compomers (Dyract and Compoglass) were tested and the conventional glass-ionomer cement (GIC) Vivaglass Base served as a control. Forty specimens were fabricated from each of the respective materials. Twenty of these specimens were placed in artificial saliva and the other 20 specimens in a fluoridated dentifrice slurry for 5 min. Then, 10 fluoridated and 10 non-fluoridated specimens were immersed in a neutral buffer solution (pH 6.8), and the other specimens were immersed in an acidic solution (pH 4.0). After 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 days the samples were again placed in either a fluoridated dentifrice slurry or saliva for 5 min, after which time they were transferred to fresh buffer solutions. The fluoride content of the solutions was assessed with a fluoride sensitive electrode. Fluoride release from all the materials decreased continuously during the experiment, with a significantly higher release in the acidic solution compared to the neutral buffer solution. Fluoridation did not result in an increased fluoride release for the compomers. However, the conventional GIC revealed a significantly higher fluoride release after fluoridation. It is concluded that Dyract and Compoglass can not be replenished with fluoride, irrespective of the pH value of the environment.     

In vitro caries-inhibitory properties of a silver cermet

Recurrent caries is one of the primary causes of failure of dental restorations. One method for reducing the frequency and severity of this problem is the use of fluoride-releasing restorative materials. The glass-ionomer cements are a type of fluoride-releasing material. They have been used extensively in recent years for a variety of clinical applications. However, in comparison with other restorative materials such as amalgam and composite resins, glass ionomers have relatively poor physical properties. Sintering of silver particles to glass-ionomer powder is a means of improving these physical properties. The sintered material is called a silver-glass ionomer or silver cermet. This study examined the in vitro caries-inhibitory potential of a silver cement by means of two methods. First, long-term fluoride release was measured. Second, an artificial caries system was used for evaluation of caries inhibition by cerment restorations in extracted teeth. In comparison with a standard glass-ionomer restorative material, fluoride release from the cermet material was significantly less throughout a 12-month period. The results from the artificial caries system indicated that this decreased fluoride release corresponded with a lesser degree of caries inhibition. Lesions around cermet restorations in both enamel and root surfaces were significantly more severe than those around conventional glass-ionomer restorations. However, in comparison with amalgam and composite resin restorations, the cermet did have some cariostatic activity.     

Fluoride release from esthetic restorative materials with and without adhesive.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the effect of surface coating containing fluoride on patterns and amounts of fluoride release from 5 esthetic restorative materials. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Twelve cylinders of each material were prepared in a plexiglass mold. The experimental groups (n = 6) were coated with 1 layer of fluoridated adhesive resin, Prompt L-Pop, while the control groups (n = 6) remained uncoated. Fluoride release into deionized water was measured on days 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28 using an ion analyzer. Results were evaluated statistically using repeated measure analysis of variance and Duncan test. RESULTS: In the uncoated materials, the highest fluoride-releasing material was a resin composite Ariston pHc (140.468 +/- 9.80) followed by Photac-fil (101.200 +/- 5.56), Ketac-fil (91.098 + 4.69), Hytac Aplitip (5.122 +/- 1.00), and Ecusit (0.310 +/- 0.18). Material-coating interaction was found to be significant, but the effect of surface coating was different for each material. Among the coated materials, conventional glass-ionomer cement Ketac-fil released the highest amount of fluoride (93.326 +/- 10.86), followed by Photac-fil (83.666 +/- 4.72), Ariston pHc (53.862 +/- 7.90), Hytac Aplitip (14.634 +/- 2.35), and Ecusit (1.355 +/- 0.29). CONCLUSION: Application of fluoridated adhesive affected fluoride release from each material in varying magnitudes.     

Effect of etching glass-ionomer cements on bond strength to composite resin

The use of glass-ionomer cement in restorative dentistry has seen a revival because of its capacity for being etched and bonded to composite resin. Past investigators compared an etched cement surface with an unetched surface that was set against a smooth surface. Clinically, however, a glassy smooth surface is not produced when the cement is used as a base. Using Scotchbond bonding resin, we developed this two-part study to evaluate the tensile bond strengths of P-30TM composite resin to several glass-ionomer cements that were (a) unetched but allowed to set in air and (b) etched for 30 s with orthophosphoric acid, and to compare them with the cohesive strength of the respective cement. Using a silver nitrate staining technique, we also evaluated the microleakage of class V cavities restored with SiluxTM composite resin under a base of etched or unetched Ketac Bond cement. Although there were significant differences among three cements between their cohesive strength and the resin bond strength after the two surface treatments (p less than 0.01), the bond to the unetched surface was generally similar to that of the etched surface of the cement. The remaining groups showed no statistical difference. The microleakage was similar in the two groups. SEM micrographs showed a rough topography of the unetched cement that resembled that of the etched surface. This in vitro study suggests that acid-etching a glass-ionomer base for resin-bonding may not be necessary for specific materials. Further clinical evaluation is recommended to validate this observation intra-orally.