An In Vitro Evaluation of the Mechanical Properties and Fluoride-releasing Ability of a New Self-cure Filling Material
Shwetha Balagopal, N. Sridhar, Kanwardeep Kaur
Flexural strength, Fluoride release, Glass ionomer cement, In vitro observational study, Restorative materials, Shear bond strength
Citation Information :
Balagopal S, Sridhar N, Kaur K. An In Vitro Evaluation of the Mechanical Properties and Fluoride-releasing Ability of a New Self-cure Filling Material. J Contemp Dent Pract 2021; 22 (2):134-139.
Aim: The aim of this study was to examine and compare the flexural strength, shear bond strength, and fluoride-releasing ability of glass ionomer cement (GIC), Fuji IX GIC®, and a new alkasite filling material, Cention N®.
Material and methods: The materials were divided into two groups, Fuji IX GIC® (n = 30) and Cention N® (n = 30) and further divided (n = 10) to test three parameters, the fluoride releasing ability, flexural strength, and shear bond strength. Fluoride release was checked using fluoride ion-selective electrode, and flexural strength and shear bond strength were tested using universal testing machine (Intron 3366, UK).
Results: Fluoride release of Fuji IX GIC® was significantly higher compared to that of control Cention N® over a period of 21 days. Flexural strength of Cention N® was significantly higher compared to Fuji IX GIC® and there were no significant differences in shear bond strength of both the materials.
Conclusion: From the results of the study, it can be concluded that Cention N® is an alkasite filling material for the complete and permanent replacement of tooth structure in posterior teeth and can be a good alternative when compared to GICs on the basis of their superior mechanical properties.
Clinical significance: Cention N® is an innovative filling material for the complete and permanent replacement of tooth structure in posterior teeth and can be a good alternative when compared to GICs on the basis of their superior mechanical properties.
Frencken JE, Peters MC, Manton DJ, et al. Minimal intervention dentistry for managing dental caries–a review: report of a FDI task group. Int Dent J 2012;62(5):223–243. DOI: 10.1111/idj.12007.
Garcia-Contreras R, Scougall-Vilchis RJ, Contreras-Bulnes R, et al. Mechanical, antibacterial and bond strength properties of nano-titanium-enriched glass ionomer cement. J Appl Oral Sci 2015;23(3):321–328. DOI: 10.1590/1678-775720140496.
Ten Cate JM, Featherstone JD. Mechanistic aspects of the interactions between fluoride and dental enamel. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 1991;2(3):283–296. DOI: 10.1177/10454411910020030101.
Featherstone JD. The caries balance: the basis for caries management by risk assessment. Oral Health Prev Dent 2004;2(Suppl. 1): 259–264. PMID: 15646583.
Crisp S, Lewis BG, Wilson AD. Glass ionomer cements: chemistry of erosion. J Dent Res 1976;55(6):1032–1041. DOI: 10.1177/00220345760550060501.
Yip HK, Lam WT, Smales RJ. Fluoride release, weight loss and erosive wear of modern aesthetic restoratives. Br Dent J 1999;187(5):265–270. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4800256.
Gupta N, Jaiswal S, Nikhil V, et al. Comparison of fluoride ion release and alkalizing potential of a new bulk-fill alkasite. J Conserv Dent 2019;22(3):296. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_74_19.
Gandolfi MG, Chersoni S, Acquaviva GL, et al. Fluoride release and absorption at different pH from glass-ionomer cements. Dent Mater 2006;22(5):441–449. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2005.04.036.
Mungara J, Philip J, Joseph E, et al. Comparative evaluation of fluoride release and recharge of pre-reacted glass ionomer composite and nano-ionomeric glass ionomer with daily fluoride exposure: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2013;31(4):234–239. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.121820.
Nicholson JW, Aggarwal A, Czarnecka B, et al. The rate of change of pH of lactic acid exposed to glass-ionomer dental cements. Biomaterials 2000;21(19):1989–1993. DOI: 10.1016/s0142-9612(00)00085-5.
Somani R, Jaidka S, Singh DJ, et al. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of various glass ionomer cements to dentin of primary teeth: an in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9(3):192–196. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1362.
Manuja N, Pandit IK, Srivastava N, et al. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of various esthetic restorative materials to dentin: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2011;29(1):7–13. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.79913.
Mazumdar P, Das A, Guha C. Comparative evaluation of hardness of different restorative materials (restorative gic, cention n, nanohybrid composite resin and silver amalgam) – an in vitro study. Int J Adv Res 2018;6(3):826–832. DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/6737.
Feiz A, Amrollahi N, Ziayi F. Comparative evaluation of microtensile bond strength of four glass-containing materials with primary teeth dentin. Iran J Pediatr 2019;29(4):e88774. DOI: 10.5812/ijp.88774.
Murthy SS, Murthy GS. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of three commercially available glass ionomer cements in primary teeth. J Int Oral Health 2015;7(8):103. PMID: 26464550. PMCID: PMC4588773.