The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 22 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2021 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

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

Keywords : 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.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3050

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-02-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

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.


PDF Share
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. Crisp S, Lewis BG, Wilson AD. Glass ionomer cements: chemistry of erosion. J Dent Res 1976;55(6):1032–1041. DOI: 10.1177/00220345760550060501.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.