Water Sorption and Solubility of a High-viscous Glass-Ionomer Cement after the Application of Different Surface-Coating Agents

Merve Nur Yilmaz; Pinar Gul; Ahmet Kiziltunc

doi:10.4103/ejgd.ejgd_50_20

European Journal of General Dentistry, Table of Contents

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · European Journal of General Dentistry 2020; 9(03): 118-121
DOI: 10.4103/ejgd.ejgd_50_20

Original Article

Water Sorption and Solubility of a High-viscous Glass-Ionomer Cement after the Application of Different Surface-Coating Agents

Merve Nur Yilmaz

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey

,

Pinar Gul

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey

,

Ahmet Kiziltunc

¹Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the effect of different surface coating agents on water sorption and solubility of a high-viscous glass ionomer cement (GIC). Materials and Methods: A high-viscous GIC (EQUIA Forte, GC, Tokyo, Japan) was used for this study. Sixty disc-shaped specimens (8 mm × 2 mm) were prepared from material. Specimens were divided six subgroups and five different coating systems were applied on specimen surfaces. Other groups were used as the control group (n = 10) (Group 1: Control, Group 2: Scotchbond Universal Adhesive (3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA), Group 3: Petroleum jelly (Vaseline, India, Lever Ltd.), Group 4: BisCover LV (Bisco, Schaumburg, IL, USA), Group 5: EQUIA Forte Coat (GC, Tokyo, Japan), Group 6: Final Varnish LC (VOCO, Cuxhaven, Germany). All specimens were prepared according to the manufacturer's instructions and subjected to water sorption and solubility tests based on the ISO 4049 requirements. Data were analyzed by paired samples t-test, one way analysis of variance, post hoc Tukey HSD, and Tamhane's T2 tests (α = 0.05). Results: Equia Forte Coat and Final Varnish LC were more successful in terms of water sorption, but Final Varnish LC was more successful in terms of solubility. Conclusion: Within the limitation of this study, it can be concluded that light-cured surface coatings, especially Final Varnish LC were more successful than other groups in terms of water sorption and solubility.

Keywords

Glass ionomer cement - solubility - surface coating - water sorption

Full Text

References

References
1 Nicholson JW. Chemistry of glass-ionomer cements: A review. Biomaterials 1998;19:485-94.
2 Wilson AD, Kent BE. A new translucent cement for dentistry. The glass ionomer cement. Br Dent J 1972;132:133-5.
3 Brito CR, Velasco LG, Bonini GA, Imparato JC, Raggio DP. Glass ionomer cement hardness after different materials for surface protection. J Biomed Mater Res A 2010;93:243-6.
4 Mount GJ. Buonocore memorial lecture. Glass-ionomer cements: Past, present and future. Oper Dent 1994;19:82-90.
5 Sidhu SK, Sherriff M, Watson TF. The effects of maturity and dehydration shrinkage on resin-modified glass-ionomer restorations. J Dent Res 1997;76:1495-501.
6 Yap A, Lee CM. Water sorption and solubility of resin-modified polyalkenoate cements. J Oral Rehabil 1997;24:310-4.
7 Frencken JE, Wolke J. Clinical and SEM assessment of ART high-viscosity glass-ionomer sealants after 8-13 years in 4 teeth. J Dent 2010;38:59-64.
8 Serra MC, Navarro MF, Freitas SF, Carvalho RM, Cury JA, Retief DH. Glass ionomer cement surface protection. Am J Dent 1994;7:203-6.
9 Lin A, McIntyre NS, Davidson RD. Studies on the adhesion of glass-ionomer cements to dentin. J Dent Res 1992;71:1836-41.
10 McLean JW. The clinical use of glass-ionomer cements. Dent Clin North Am 1992;36:693-711.
11 Kleverlaan CJ, van Duinen RN, Feilzer AJ. Mechanical properties of glass ionomer cements affected by curing methods. Dent Mater 2004;20:45-50.
12 Pegoraro TA, da Silva NR, Carvalho RM. Cements for use in esthetic dentistry. Dent Clin North Am 2007;51:453-71, x.
13 Booth SE, Coleman NJ. Properties of glass-ionomer cements sealed with petroleum jelly or wax. Int Scholarly Sci Res Innov 2012;6:1133-6.
14 Forsten L. Fluoride release from a glass ionomer cement. Eur J Oral Sci 1977;85:503-4.
15 Nicholson JW, Czarnecka B. Kinetic studies of the effect of varnish on water loss by glass-ionomer cements. Dent Mater 2007;23:1549-52.
16 Fatima N, Ali Abidi SY, Qazi FU, Jat SA. Effectiveness of commonly available surface protecting agents in maintaining microhardness of two cements. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2013;23:315-8.
17 Malmström HS, McCormack SM, Fried D, Featherstone JD. Effect of CO₂ laser on pulpal temperature and surface morphology: An in vitro study. J Dent 2001;29:521-9.
18 Tarle Z, Meniga A, Knezević A, Sutalo J, Ristić M, Pichler G. Composite conversion and temperature rise using a conventional, plasma arc, and an experimental blue LED curing unit. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29:662-7.
19 Omidi BR, Gosili A, Jaber-Ansari M, Mahdkhah A. Intensity output and effectiveness of light curing units in dental offices. J Clin Exp Dent 2018;10:e555-e560.
20 Hesse D, Bonifácio CC, Kleverlaan CJ, Raggio DP. Clinical wear of approximal glass ionomer restorations protected with a nanofilled self-adhesive light-cured protective coating. J Appl Oral Sci 2018;26:e20180094.
21 Leite JB, Giro EM, Cruz CA. Estudo comparativo da dureza superficial de cimentos ionoméricos restauradores submetidos a condiçöes de umidade e dessecamento. Rev Odontol UNESP 1999;28:119-35.
22 Earl MS, Mount GJ, Hume WR. The effect of varnishes and other surface treatments on water movement across the glass ionomer cement surface. II. Aust Dent J 1989;34:326-9.