Effect Of Fluoride Release Of Different Restorative Materials On Remineraliation Of Dentin
Volume 3 - Issue 2, February 2019 Edition
[Download Full Paper]
Author(s)
Alaa M. Moharam, Sameh M. Nabih, Nady M. Ibrahim
Keywords
Giomr,Fluoride release, Fluoride uptake, Remineralization.
Abstract
Background: Dental caries is one of the most prevalent chronic diseases affecting humanity, its progression or control depends on the balance between pathological and protective factors, and the best strategy for caries management is focused on methods of improving the remineralizing process. Three different fluoride restorative materials were used and compared to study the effect of fluoride release on remimeralization of dentin. Objectives: To evaluate the fluoride release of three different fluoride releasing restorative materials, Fuji IX GC, Fuji II LC and Beautifil injectable and their effects on remineralization of dentin before and after recharging. Materials and Methods: The experiement required measurement of cumulative fluoride release, through a microprocessor based portable fluoride meter by subjecting three groups of fluoride release restorative materials (Fuji IX GC, Fuji II LC and Beautifil injectable) to pH cycling three times daily for twenty minutes between the artificial saliva for neutralization at pH 7 and citric acid at PH4. The cumulative fluoride release measured at one week, four weeks and twelve weeks. The remineraliation of dentin is assessed through dentin restorative materials samples exposed to pH cycling and measured by measurement of fluoride uptake into dentinal tubules at one week and twelve weeks before and after recharging. Through using quantitative environmental scanning electron microscope (QESEM). Results: Regarding cumulative fluoride release assessment Fuji IX GC is the highest statistically significant than other tested fluoride releasing restorative material at the three aging periods tested at this study and at the two aging media exposed the three tested materials ,and regarding fluoride uptake assessment beautifil injectable highly significant difference than other two tested restorative materials at both aging periods and both aging media tested at this study. Also, the results revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between fluoride uptake values after recharging. Conclusion: Under the circumstances of this study conventional glass ionomer restorative material is the martial of choice regarding fluoride release represented by Fuji IX GC, the glass ionomer modified resin composite (Giomer represented by newly introduced beatifil injectable) has the advantage of fluoride uptake and remineralization.no statistical significance before and after recharging of glass ionomer rstoratives.
References
[1]. Benelli EM, Serra MC and Rodrigues AL. In situ anticariogenic potential of glass inomer cement. Caries res 2014; 27:280-284.
[2]. Fejerskov O, Nyvad B and Kidd. Dental caries: The disease and its clinical management (Third ed.). 2015.
[3]. Cochrane NJ, Cai F and Huq NL. New approaches to enhanced remineralization of tooth enamel. Journal of Dental Research 2010; 89(11): 1187-97.
[4]. Li X, Wang J and Joiner A. The remineralisation of enamel: a review of the literature. Journal of dentistry. 2014; 42: S12-20.
[5]. Garcia-Godoy F and Hicks J. Maintaining the integrity of the enamel surface. American Dental Association 2008; 139(3).
[6]. Hicks J, Garcia-Godoy F and Flaitz C. Biological factors in dental caries: role of saliva and dental plaque in the dynamic process of demineralization and remineralization (part 1). Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry 2004; 28(1):47-52.
[7]. Qvist V, Laurberg L and Poulsen A. Eight year study on conventional glass inomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth. Acta Odontol Scand 2004; 62: 37-45.
[8]. Berg JH, Donly KJ and Posnick WR. Glass inomer-silver Quintessence Int 2003; 19:639-641.
[9]. Koga H, Kameyama A and Matsukulo T. comparison of short-term in vitro fluoride release and recharge from four different types of pit-fissure sealeants 2011; 46; 465-477.
[10]. Kusgoz A, Tuzuner T and Kemer B. Microhardness conversion degree and fluoride release of different fissure sealants. J Mech behave biomed mater 2010; 3: 594-599.
[11]. ten Cate JM and van Duinen RN. Hypermineralization of dentinal lesions adjacent to glass-ionomer cement restorations. J Dent Res 1995; 74: 1266-1271.
[12]. Sieixas LC, Seiaxas FH and Souza WC. Demeneralization around restorations with different restorative materials containing fluoride. Mater Res 2004; 7: 235-240.
[13]. Magalhães CS, Hara AT and Turssi CP. Microhardness evaluation around composite restorations using fluoride containing adhesive systems. J Appl Oral Sci 2005; 13: 259-264.
[14]. Mukai Y, Shiiy T and Kamijo K. Formation of inhibition layer with a newly developed fluoride releasing all in one adhesive. Dent Mater J 2005; 24: 172:177.
[15]. Itota T, Carrick TE and Rusby G. Determination of fluoride release from resin based dental materials using ion selective electrode. J Dent 2004; 32; 117-122.
[16]. Arbabzudeh Z and Gibbs T. Recharge pattern of contemporary glass ionomer restoratives. Dent Res J (Isfhan) 2012; 9: 139-145.
[17]. Wiegand A, Buchalla W and Attin T. Review on fluoride-releasing restorative materials-fluoride release and uptake characteristics, antibacterial activity and influence on caries formation. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 343-362.
[18]. Hattab FN and Amin WM. Fluoride release from glass ionomer restorative materials and the effects of surface coating. Biomater 2001; 22: 1449-1458.
[19]. Horsted-Bindslev P. Fluoride release from alternative restorative materials. J Dent 1994; 22(1): S17-20.
[20]. Harhash AY. Effect of fluoride releasing adhesives and fluoride uptake by tooth substrate on nanoleakage and shear bond strength of resin composite to dentin. PhD thesis 2007; Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University.
[21]. Hashimoto M, De Munck J, Ito S, Sano H, Kaga M, Oguchi H, Van Meerbeek B and Pashly DH. In vitro effect of nanoleakage expression on resin-dentin bond strengths analyzed by microtensile bond test, SEM/EDX and TEM. Biomater 2004; 25: 5565-5574.
[22]. Yu H, Wegehaupt FJ, Wiegand A, Roos M, Attin T and Buchalla W. Erosion and abrasion of tooth-colored restorative materials and human enamel. J Dent 2009; 37: 913-922.
[23]. Abo El Naga AIM. Effect of load and pH-cycling on nanoeakage patterns a dentin adhesive interface of different bonding systems. PhD thesis 2006; Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University.
[24]. Dionysopoulos D, Koliniotou-Koumpia E, Hevatzoglou-Antoniades M, Kotsanos N. Fluoride release ad recharge abilities of contemporary fluoride-containing restorative materials and dental adhesives. Dent Mater J 2013; 32: 296-304.
[25]. Chan WD, Yang, Wan W and Rizkala AS. Fluoride release from dental cements and composites: a mechanistic study. Dent Mater 2006; 22: 366-373.
[26]. Mc Lean JW, Nicholson JW and Wilson AD. Propsed nomenclature for glass ionomer dental cements and related materials .quintessence Int.1994; 5: 587-589.
[27]. Tay FR, Pashley EL, Huang C, Hashimoto M, Sano H, Smales RJ and Pashley DH. The glass-ionomer phase in resin-based restorative materials. J Dent Res 2001; 80: 1808-1812.
[28]. Itota T, Carrick TE, Rusby S, Al-Naimi OT, Yoshiyama M and McCabe JF. Determination of fluoride ions released from resin-based dental materials using ion-selective electrode and ion chromatograph. J Dent; 2004; 32: 117-122.
[29]. Kavaloglu Cildir S and Sandalli N. Compressive strength, surface roughness, fluoride release and recharge of four new fluoride-releasing fissure sealants. Dent Mater J 2007; 26: 335-341.
[30]. Wang XY, Yap AU. Effects of environomental calcium and phosphate on wear and strength of glass ionomers exposed to acidic conditions. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2008; 88: 458-464.
[31]. Nomoto R, McCabe JF. A simple acid erosion test for dental water based cements. Dent Mater. 2001; 17: 53-59.
[32]. Bell A, Creanor SL, Foye RH and Saunders WP. The effect of saliva on fluoride release by a glass-ionomer filling material. J Oral Rehabil 1999; 26: 407-412.
[33]. Hotta M, Li Y and Sekine I. Mineraization in bovine dentin adjacent to glass-ionomer restorations. J Dent 2001; 29: 211-215.
[34]. Ikemura K, Kouro Y and Endo T. Effect of 4-Acryloxyethyltrimelletic acid in a self-etching primer on bonding to ground dentin. Dent Mater J 1996; 15: 132-143.
[35]. Ibrahim SH. Bonding mechanism of giomer to enamel and dentin with and without pre-etching. Master's thesis 2007; Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University.
[36]. Hashem A, Bader NA and El-Gezawi MF. Assessment of fluoride release and uptake before and after recharging of clinically simulated surface of conventional and modified glass ionomers. Egy Dent J 2002; 48: 117-131.
[37]. Attin T,buchalla W, Siewert C and Helling E. Fluoride release of polyacid modified resin composite in neutral and acidic buffer solutions. J. Oral Rehbil.1999; 26:388-393.
[38]. Seppa l. Fluoride release and effect on enamel softening by fluoride treated and fluoride untreated glass ionomer specimens. Caris Res. 1994; 28: 406-408.
