Fluoride release from three glass ionomers, a compomer, and a composite resin in water, artificial saliva, and lactic acid

The amounts and the pattern of fluoride release from one metal-reinforced glass ionomer cement, two resin-modified glass ionomer cements, one compomer, and one composite resin placed in double-distilled water, artificial saliva, and lactic acid were evaluated in this study. Measurements of fluoride ion release were made for a total of 105 cylindrical specimens (10 mm in diameter and 1.5 mm in height). They were taken over a period of 16 weeks at the intervals of 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours, as well as 2, 3, 7, 14, 28, 56, and 112 days. The pattern of fluoride release was similar for all of the examined materials. The greatest amount of fluoride was released from the metal-reinforced glass ionomer Argion. The resin-modified glass ionomers Vitremer, Fuji II LC; the compomer Dyract; and the composite resin Tetric followed in ranking order. The pH of the environment strongly affected the fluoride release from the materials. There was a significant difference (P < 0.001) in the amounts of fluoride released in lactic acid vs water and artificial saliva, whereas, there was no significant difference (P > 0.05) in the amounts of fluoride released in water vs artificial saliva.     

Single-crystalline ceramic whisker-reinforced carboxylic acid-resin composites with fluoride release

Currently available glass-ionomer, resin-modified glass-ionomer, and compomer materials have relatively low strength and toughness and, therefore, are inadequate for use in large stress-bearing posterior restorations. In the present study, ceramic single-crystalline whiskers were mixed with fluorosilicate glass particles and used as fillers to reinforce experimental carboxylic acid-resin composites. The carboxylic acid was a monofunctional methacryloxyethyl phthalate (MEP). Five mass fractions of whisker/(whisker + fluorosilicate glass), and corresponding resin (resin + MEP), were evaluated. Four control materials were also tested for comparison: a glass ionomer, a resin-modified glass ionomer, a compomer, and a hybrid composite resin. Flexural specimens were fabricated to measure the flexural strength, elastic modulus, and work-of-fracture (an indication of toughness). Fluoride release was measured by using a fluoride ion selective electrode. The properties of whisker composites depended on the whisker/(whisker + fluorosilicate glass) mass fraction. At a mass fraction of 0.8, the whisker composite had a flexural strength in MPa (mean +/- sd; n = 6) of 150 +/- 16, significantly higher than that of a glass ionomer (15 +/- 7) or a compomer control (89 +/- 18) (Tukey's multiple comparison test; family confidence coefficient = 0.95). Depending on the ratio of whisker:fluorosilicate glass, the whisker composites had a cumulative fluoride release up to 60% of that of a traditional glass ionomer. To conclude, combining ceramic whiskers and fluorosilicate glass in a carboxylic acid-resin matrix can result in fluoride-releasing composites with significantly improved mechanical properties.     

Fluoride release from restorative materials and a luting cement

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: In addition to conventional glass ionomers, a considerable number of different types of materials have been formulated to release fluoride. Variation in composition results in quantitative differences in the amount of fluoride release by these materials. PURPOSE: This study evaluated and compared fluoride release in distilled water from different types of restorative materials and a luting cement. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fluoride release from 4 glass ionomer formulation restorative materials (Miracle-Mix, Fuji ionomer type III, Fuji II LC improved, and Ketac-Silver), a luting cement (Ketac Cem), a compomer (Compoglass Flow), 2 sealants (Fissurit F, Helioseal F), and a composite resin (Tetric) was evaluated at time intervals of 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours and 2, 3, 7, 14, 28, 56, and 112 days. Seven disks of each material were made and stored for equilibration in double distilled water at 37 degrees C for the time of each measurement. The equilibrated solution was analyzed for fluoride with a TISAB and an ion-specific combination electrode (ORION 960900) connected to an expandable ion analyzer (Crison micropH 2002). Data were analyzed by means of univariate analysis of variance, the Dunnett C post hoc test, and repeated measures analysis. RESULTS: Fluoride was released from all the evaluated materials, with considerable variation in the rate of release but a similar pattern. Among the materials tested, fluoride release from glass ionomer formulations was greater than that from composite resin formulations; the rank of decreasing order was as follows: Miracle Mix > Fuji III, Ketac Cem > Fuji II LC > Ketac Silver, Compoglass F > Fissurit F, Helioseal F > Tetric (> indicates statistical significance; P< .05). CONCLUSION: Under the conditions of this study, glass ionomer formulations and the compomer released more fluoride than the sealants and the composite resin tested.     

Short-term fluoride release from various aesthetic restorative materials

The short-term fluoride release of a giomer (Reactmer), a compomer (Dyract AP), a conventional glass ionomer cement (Fuji II Cap) and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji II LC) was evaluated and compared. Specimen discs (6 +/-0.2 mm diameter and 1 +/- 0.2 mm thick) were prepared for each material using custom molds. Each disc was placed in 1 ml of deionized for 24 hours at 37 degrees C. After one day, the water was extracted and analyzed. The specimen discs were then re-immersed into another 1 ml of fresh deionized water. The procedure of removing and refilling the water was repeated for 28 days. Sample solutions taken during the first seven days and at days 14, 21 and 28 were introduced into a capillary electrophoresis system using field amplified sample injection (FASI) to determine fluoride release. Data was analyzed using factorial ANOVA/Scheffe's post-hoc test at significance level 0.05. An initial fluoride "burst" effect was observed with glass ionomers. Both compomer and giomer did not show an initial fluoride "burst" effect. With the exception of the compomer, fluoride release at day one was generally significantly greater than at the other time intervals. The glass ionomers released significantly more fluoride than the compomer and giomer at day one. Although fluoride release of the giomer was significantly greater than the other materials at day seven, it became significantly lower at day 28.     

Laboratory strength of glass ionomer cement, compomers, and resin composites

PURPOSE: The study evaluates the compressive, flexural, and diametral tensile strengths of 8 core build-up materials from different material classes (highly viscous glass ionomer cement, autocured resin composite, and compomers). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All materials were manipulated according to the manufacturers' recommendations for use as core materials. At a temperature of 23.0 +/- 1.0 degrees C the properties of compressive, diametral tensile and flexural strength were determined using a universal testing machine at 15 minutes, 1 hour, and 24 hours after material preparation. Using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), multiple mean value comparisons were performed to determine significant differences (p< or =.05) between the core restoration materials. RESULTS: The values for compressive strength varied from 40.3 +/- 5.2 MPa (compomer) to 237.4 +/- 37.3 MPa (autocured resin composite) for the 3 measurement times. At 15 minutes, 1 hour, and 24 hours after first mixing, the ANOVA showed significant differences (p < or =.05) between the resin composite Core Paste and all of the other materials. Diametral tensile strengths ranged from 5.5 +/- 1.1 MPa for glass ionomer cement to 39.1 +/- 2.9 MPa for composite core material. Three-point flexural strength showed values ranging from 12.1 +/- 2.5 MPa for glass ionomer cement to 92.1 +/- 9.7 MPa for compomer between the 3 measurement times. CONCLUSIONS: Setting time influences the mechanical properties of the materials tested in this study. Autopolymerizing resin composite Core Paste demonstrated greater compressive and flexural strengths at the 3 measurement times than the other materials tested. Reinforced composites, in comparison to the autocured resin composites, yielded no improvement in tensile strength. Flexural and tensile strengths of the glass ionomer cement were lower than those of autocured resin composites and compomers.     

Evaluation of a new 2-paste glass ionomer cement

A new 2-paste resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement, Fuji Ortho Band Paste Pak (GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), for the placement of orthodontic bands, has been developed for easier handling. The aim of this study was to compare the fluoride release and uptake characteristics of this cement with that of 3 others commonly used to cement orthodontic bands: a conventional resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement, a polyacid-modified composite resin, and a conventional glass ionomer cement. Fluoride release was measured during a 28-day period. After the measurement on day 28, experimental samples were exposed to 1000 ppm sodium fluoride solution for 5 minutes, and fluoride release was then measured for 7 days. Initially, the new 2-paste resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement released the greatest amount of fluoride; the polyacid-modified composite resin released the least initially, and it continued to show the lowest values throughout the study. The fluoride uptake and release values of the new 2-paste resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement were statistically significantly higher than those of the conventional resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement or the conventional glass ionomer cement. The new 2-paste resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement might be a good alternative to conventional products for cementing orthodontic bands.     

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.     

Effect of alcoholic and low-pH soft drinks on fluoride release from compomer

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the amount of fluoride released from compomer restorative materials after immersion in various media. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this test, four materials were used: three compomers (Dyract, Dentsply, Konstanz, Germany; Compoglass, Vivadent, Schaan, Principality of Liechtenstein; and Xeno, Sankins, Tochigi, Japan) and one resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji II LC, GC, Tokyo, Japan). There were four test solutions: one alcoholic (whiskey), two low-pH drinks (Coca-Cola, orange juice), and one deionized water. Over a period of 60 days, the tested specimens were immersed in the test solution for 3 hours every day, then kept in deionized water. The fluoride released was detected by using a fluoride ion selective electrode connected to a microprocessor ion analyzer. The fluoride ion concentration (ppm) of the test solutions and deionized water was recorded after 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 30, and 60 days. Electron probe microanalysis was used for surface analysis of the fluoride released. RESULTS: When immersed in low-pH soft drinks, compomer showed a significantly higher fluoride release than when immersed in deionized water (p < .0001). For specimens immersed in Coca-Cola, the fluoride release levels (microgram/cm2, mean +/- SD) at 1, 7, and 60 days for Dyract (91.6 +/- 1.8, 39.3 +/- 3.1, 10.5 +/- 0.9), Compoglass (129.5 +/- 0.9, 66.5 +/- 2.7, 19.0 +/- 0.3), Fuji II LC (147.0 +/- 4.2, 50.8 +/- 3.1, 27.6 +/- 3.0), and Xeno (73.6 +/- 3.2, 27.3 +/- 2.1, 6.6 +/- 0.6) demonstrated the trend of significantly lower releases with time in water solution. Over a 60-day period, materials immersed in 100% orange juice released the highest amount of fluoride, which could be attributable to the erosive effect of the medium. Materials immersed in deionized water released the least amount of fluoride. Among the tested compomers, Compoglass released the most fluoride.     

Dental resin composites containing ceramic whiskers and precured glass ionomer particles.

OBJECTIVES: Glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, and compomer materials are susceptible to brittle fracture and are inadequate for use in large stress-bearing posterior restorations. The aim of this study was to use ceramic single crystal whiskers to reinforce composites formulated with precured glass ionomer, and to examine the effects of whisker-to-precured glass ionomer mass ratio on mechanical properties, fluoride release, and polishability of the composites. METHODS: Silica particles were fused onto silicon nitride whiskers to facilitate silanization and to improve whisker retention in the matrix. Hardened glass ionomer was ground into a fine powder, mixed with whiskers, and used as fillers for a dental resin. Four control materials were also tested: a glass ionomer, a resin-modified glass ionomer, a compomer, and a hybrid composite. A three-point flexural test was used to measure flexural strength, modulus, and work-of-fracture. A fluoride ion-selective electrode was used to measure fluoride release. Composite surfaces polished simulating clinical procedures were examined by SEM and profilometry. RESULTS: At whisker/(whisker + precured glass ionomer) mass fractions of 1.0 and 0.91, the whisker composite had a flexural strength in MPa (mean (SD); n = 6) of (196 (10)) and (150 (16)), respectively, compared to (15 (7)) for glass ionomer, (39 (8)) for resin-modified glass ionomer, (89 (18)) for compomer, and (120 (16)) for hybrid composite. The whisker composite had a cumulative fluoride release of nearly 20% of that of the glass ionomer after 90 days. The whisker composites had surface roughness comparable to the hybrid resin composite. SIGNIFICANCE: Composites filled with precured glass ionomer particles and whiskers exhibit moderate fluoride release with improved mechanical properties; the whisker-to-glass ionomer ratio is a key microstructural parameter that controls fluoride release and mechanical properties.     

Fluoride release from glass ionomer cements and resin composites coated with a dentin adhesive.

OBJECTIVES: This laboratory study compared the effect of surface coatings on patterns and amounts of fluoride released from four glass ionomer cements and two fluoride-containing resin composites. METHODS: Twelve cylinders of each material were prepared in a polyethylene mold. The experimental groups (n = 6) were coated with one layer of an adhesive resin (3M Scotchbond Multipurpose Adhesive), while the control groups (n = 6) remained uncoated. Cumulative fluoride release into deionized water was measured on days 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21 and 28 using an ion analyzer. Total fluoride release after 28 days was analyzed for significant differences among materials using one-way ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls test (p < 0.05). RESULTS: The total amounts of fluoride release from the coated samples were found to be significantly less than the uncoated samples for all materials, except Solitaire. The uncoated samples released a total amount of fluoride of between 2.3 and 85.4 ppm, while the coated samples released a total amount of fluoride of between < 0.2 and 24.1 ppm. Similar patterns of fluoride release were found in coated and uncoated samples. SIGNIFICANCE: The results indicated that the application of a dentin adhesive coating did not completely prevent fluoride release from glass ionomer cements and fluoridated resin composites, although the amounts were significantly less. Clinically, it suggests that a continued release of fluoride from glass ionomer cements and fluoridated resin composites is possible after placing a thin layer of resin adhesive. The clinical significance of these findings is not known.     

不同品牌玻璃离子水门汀氟释放的比较

目的：离体比较临床用不同品牌及固化方式的玻璃离子水门汀（ＧＩＣ）氟释放情况，为临床使用含氟充填材料防龋提供理论依据。方法：４种ＧＩＣ，分别为Ｓｈｏｆｕ，青浦，Ｃｈｅｍｆｉｌ３种化学固化型和ＶｉｔｒｅｍｅｒＴＭ光固化型ＧＩＣ，离子选择电极法测量材料在去离子水中氟释放量。结果：所有测试材料在实验期间都能在去离子水中持续释放氟，ＶｉｔｅｒｍｅｒＴＭ、Ｓｈｏｆｕ、Ｃｈｅｍｆｉｌ和青浦分别为（２１．１１±９．７６）μｇ、（８．０８±４．４３）μｇ、（６．５２±３．２８）μｇ，（１７．６７±６．９３）μｇ（Ｐ＜０．０１）。结论：不同品牌及固化方式的ＧＩＣ氟释放能力不同，树脂基因引入玻璃离子水门汀并不影响其氟释放能力。     

Fluoride release from a glass ionomer cement

abstract – The release of fluoride from a glass ionomer cement (ASPA®) was. compared with that from a silicate cement. Test specimens were shaken in a solution with hydroxyapadte for 7 weeks. The solution was changed every week and the fluoride taken up by the hydroxyapatite measured. The specimens released considerably more fluoride during each of the first 2 weeks than during each of the subsequent 5 weeks. The continued release did not decrease very much with time. Slightly more fluoride was released from the glass ionomer cement than from the silicate.     

Fluoride release from a glass ionomer cement.

The release of fluoride from a glass ionomer cement (ASPA) was compared with that from a silicate cement. Test specimens were shaken in a solution with hydroxyapatite for 7 weeks. The solution was changed every week and the fluoride taken up by the hydroxyapatite measured. The specimens released considerably more fluoride during each of the first 2 weeks than during each of the subsequent 5 weeks. The continued release did not decrease very much with time. Slightly more fluoride was released from the glass ionomer cement than from the silicate.     

Long-term F release from glass ionomer cements

Fluoride release from three commercial glass ionomer filling cements and three glass ionomer luting cements was measured in the laboratory over a 12-month period. Fluoride release from these glass ionomer cements was compared with that released from a silicate, silicophosphate, and a fluoride-containing polycarboxylate cement. The fluoride released from the glass ionomer cements throughout the one-year period was similar, both in quantity and pattern, to that released by the silicate cement. The silicophosphate cement tended to release fluoride in somewhat lesser amounts, while the amount of fluoride released by the polycarboxylate was negligible after the first few days. Analysis of these data indicates that these glass ionomer cements probably possess anticariogenic properties similar to those of silicate cement.     

Fluoride release and uptake capacities of fluoride-releasing restorative materials

Many fluoride-releasing dental materials are being sold on the basis of their cariostatic properties. However, the amount fluoride release of these materials is still uncertain. This study investigated the fluoride release and uptake characteristics of four flowable resin composites (Heliomolar Flow, Tetric Flow, Wave, Perma Flo), one flowable compomer (Dyract flow), one conventional glass ionomer cement mixed with two different powder/liquid ratios (ChemFlex Syringeable and ChemFlex Condensable), one packable resin composite (SureFil), one ion-releasing composite (Ariston pHc) and one resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Vitremer). Seven discs (6-mm diameter and 1.5-mm height) were prepared for each material. Each disc was immersed in 3.5 ml of deionized water within a plastic vial and stored at 37 degrees C. The deionized water was changed every 24 hours and the release of fluoride was measured for 30 days. At the end of this period, the samples were recharged with 2 ml of 1.23% acidulated phosphate fluoride (APF) gel for four minutes. Then, all samples were reassessed for an additional 10 days. The fluoride release of all samples was measured with a specific fluoride electrode and an ionanalyzer. Statistical analyses were conducted using two-way repeated measure ANOVA and Duncan's multiple range tests. For all tested materials, the greatest fluoride release was observed after the first day of the study (p<0.01) but gradually diminished with time. During the test period, Tetric Flow released the lowest amount of fluoride; however, no statistically significant difference was found from Wave and Heliomolar Flow (p>0.05). Ariston pHc released the highest amount of fluoride, followed by ChemFlex Syringeable, Vitremer and ChemFlex Condensable. There were statistically significant differences among these materials (p<0.05). Fluoride release of all materials were significantly increased after the first day following refluoridation and Ariston pHc released the greatest among all materials (p<0.01). At the end of two days of refluoridation, the fluoride release rate for each material dropped quickly and stabilized within three days.     

Fluoride release in vitro from various glass ionomer cements and resin composites after exposure to NaF solutions

The release of fluoride from 1) discs made from five glass ionomer cements and two composites, and 2) the same discs after exposure to different NaF solutions, were studied. The specimens were placed in distilled water for 10 wk. After 24 h and then once a week, the specimens were transferred to fresh distilled water. After 5 wk, the specimens were divided into four groups and exposed to 0, 0.02, 0.2 and 2% NaF solutions for 5 min. The fluoride release was highest during the first week after preparation, after which it decreased sharply and then more slowly. The amount of fluoride released was ordered: liner/base>restorative glass ionomer>composites. The composites released significantly less fluoride than the glass ionomer cements. After exposure to NaF, the fluoride release was significantly higher for the silver cermet material than for the other glass ionomers tested. From a clinical point of view, the results from this study imply that glass ionomer restorations may act as intraoral devices for the controlled slow release of fluoride at sites at risk for recurrent caries.     

Laboratory evaluation of a compomer and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement for orthodontic bonding

The mean shear debonding force of stainless steel orthodontic brackets with microetched bases bonded with either a compomer or a resin-modified glass ionomer cement was assessed. In addition, the amount of cement remaining on the enamel surface following bracket removal was evaluated. Finally, survival time of orthodontic brackets bonded with these materials was assessed following simulated mechanical stress in a ball mill. Debonding force and survival time data were compared with those obtained for brackets bonded with a chemically cured resin adhesive, a light-cured resin adhesive, and a conventional glass ionomer cement. There were no significant differences in mean shear debonding force of brackets bonded with the compomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, chemically cured resin adhesive, or the light-cured resin adhesive. Brackets bonded with a conventional glass ionomer cement had a significantly lower mean shear debonding force than that recorded for the other materials. The Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) mode score indicated that significantly less cement remained on the enamel following debonding of brackets cemented with resin-modified or conventional glass ionomers compared with other adhesives. The median survival time for brackets cemented with the compomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, chemically cured resin, or light-cured resin were significantly longer than for brackets cemented with conventional glass ionomer. The compomer and the resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive appear to offer viable alternatives to the more commonly used resin adhesives for bracket bonding.     

Fluoride release from orthodontic adhesives

Two commercial orthodontic adhesives containing fluoride were evaluated in vitro for fluoride release. Fluoride release is critical in preventing both decalcification around orthodontic brackets and the formation of white spot lesions. A paste-type adhesive composite resin and a glass ionomer luting agent were compared to a glass ionomer restorative material to determine fluoride release. The composite resin adhesive released minimal fluoride for only three days and then ceased. The glass ionomer adhesive released fluoride at a similar rate to the glass ionomer restorative material with fluoride release still evident at three months.     

Fluoride release from a fluoride-containing amalgam, a glass ionomer cement and a silicate cement in artificial saliva

This study aimed to compare the fluoride release from a flouride-containing amalgam, a silicate cement and a glass ionomer cement in artificial saliva. After storing specimens in an artificial saliva for 7 weeks, the fluoride content in the solvent was measured by a spectrophotometric method. The fluoride release from silicate cement was about 5 times greater than from glass ionomer cement, which again showed a release 4 times greater than the fluoride-containing amalgam. The fluoride release relative to fluoride content in test specimens was greater from fluoride-containing amalgam and silicate cement than from glass ionomer cement.     

A comparison of fluoride release by resin-modified GIC and polyacid-modified composite resin.

The objective of this study was to compare the fluoride release of 2 fluoride-containing orthodontic adhesives from bracketed teeth and adhesive disks, a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji Ortho LC, encapsulated; GC America Corp, Aslip, Ill) and a polyacid-modified composite resin (Assure; Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, Ill). A composite resin without fluoride (Transbond XT; 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) was used as a reference control. Metal brackets were bonded to the buccal surfaces of 120 human premolars (40 teeth per adhesive), and disks were made from each adhesive. The deionized storage water was changed, and fluoride release was measured at specified intervals up to 28 days for the bracketed teeth and up to 150 days for the disks. Fuji Ortho LC released 75% more accumulated fluoride than Assure (6.61 microg/bracket vs 3.77 microg/bracket) from bracketed teeth over the 28-day observation period. Assure released more fluoride per day than did Fuji Ortho LC from the disks during the first 3 months. For the rest of the 150-day period, Fuji Ortho LC released more fluoride per day than did Assure. The amount of fluoride released by these materials varied dramatically with different water-changing protocols. The large discrepancy between fluoride released from disks compared with that released from bracketed teeth suggests that caution must be used in extrapolating fluoride-release levels of adhesive disks to in vivo treatment conditions.