Análise da dureza de um novo material restaurador para ART: Glass Carbomer

Lopes, Célia Maria Condeixa de França; Schubert, Edward Werner; Reis, Alessandra; Wambier, Denise Stadler

doi:10.1590/1807-2577.10915

Cited by 5 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Its manufacturer states that it differs from conventional GICs because its organic matrix is composed by nanoparticles of glass enriched with fluor/hydroxyapatite 8 . There are reports in the literature on the physical and mechanical properties of glass carbomer [9][10][11][12][13] . Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the fluoride release and recharge of different types of glass ionomer cements submitted to topical application of acidulated fluoride in vitro, as well as the surface roughness of these materials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fluoride release and surface roughness of a new glass ionomer cement: glass carbomer

Lopes

Galvan

Chibinski

et al. 2018

Rev. odontol. UNESP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This study analyzed the fluoride release/recharge and surface roughness of glass carbomer compared to other encapsulated glass ionomer cements (GICs). Material and method The GICs tested were Glass Fill® (GC-GCP Dental), Riva Self Cure® (RS-SDI), Riva Light Cure® (RL-SDI), Equia Fil® (EF-GC Europe). The composite resin Luna® (LU-SDI) was used as control. Five samples of each material were prepared and kept in a humidifier for 24 hours (37 °C, 100% relative humidity). Fluoride release was measured in two times: before (T1: days 1, 2, 7, 14) and after topical application of fluoride (T2: days 15, 16, 21 and 28). The surface roughness was also measured in both times (T1: days 1 and 14; T2: days 15 and 28). All samples were submitted to a single topical application of acidulated fluoride phosphate (Fluor Care - FGM). Two-way ANOVA with repeated measures and Tukey's post-test (p <0.05) were used in the statistical analysis. Result Equia Fil presented the highest fluoride release in both evaluation periods, with a higher release in T1 (p <0.05). The other materials tested, including glass carbomer presented similar release in both periods (T1 and T2). Regarding surface roughness, no significant differences were observed in the interaction between the material × time factors (T1 and T2) (p=0.966). Conclusion The GICs tested presented fluoride release and recharge ability and showed no surface roughness increase by topical application of fluoride.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fluoride release and surface roughness of a new glass ionomer cement: glass carbomer

Lopes

Galvan

Chibinski

et al. 2018

Rev. odontol. UNESP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Neste estudo, o tipo de acabamento e polimento não influenciou na dureza das restaurações. Quanto ao fator tipo de material, o CIV modificado por resina apresentou resultados inferiores de microdureza, em conformidade com o estudo de Lopes et al 10 , no qual foi observada uma maior absorção de água pelo CIV modificado por resina, em comparação com os CIV convencionais. Esse fato está relacionado com a sua composição química, particularmente com a presença dos grupos funcionais hidrofílicos na matriz polimérica (como o HEMA) e suas interações, o que resultaria numa ligeira diminuição da resistência à flexão e da dureza dos CIV modificados.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Esta propriedade se refere à resistência que um material apresenta quando submetido a uma edentação, sendo, portanto, resultado da interação de propriedades, como ductibilidade, maleabilidade e resistência ao corte e à abrasão. Um baixo valor de microdureza pode propiciar a ocorrência de degradação superficial, facilitando, dessa forma, o acúmulo de biofilme na restauração 10,11 .…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Avaliação de rugosidade, dureza e superfície dos cimentos de ionômero de vidro após diferentes sistemas de acabamento e polimento

Almeida

Medeiros

Araújo

et al. 2017

Rev. odontol. UNESP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The roughness of glass ionomer cement (GIC) is a limitation that interferes with its mechanical and aesthetic performance, and it is necessary to use appropriate finishing and polishing procedures in restorations produced with this material. Objective: To evaluate the effect of different finishing and polishing systems on roughness, hardness and surface of restorations performed with two types of GIC. Material and method: 100 specimens were made and divided into 10 groups, according to the type of GIC (conventional and resin modified GIC) and the finishing and polishing system used (C (Control) -Mylar strip; PD -diamond burs; DA -abrasive disks; PE -Enhance system; BM -carbide burs). After 7 days in distilled water, the specimens were evaluated by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and submitted to surface roughness and Vickers microhardness tests. Statistical analysis was performed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey post-test. Result: SEM analysis demonstrated a smoother surface in BM group in both types of GIC. Regarding roughness, a statistically significant difference (p <0.05) was observed between some groups of conventional GIC, but there was no difference between GIC types. Regarding hardness, conventional GIC showed better results than resin-modified GIC; Concerning to finishing and polishing materials factor, there was no statistically significant difference, regardless of the type of GIC. Conclusion: BM groups presented better results on SEM; The type of GIC did not influence the roughness values; The type of polishing did not influence the hardness.

show abstract

“…After this procedure, a new polyester strip (Maquira Dental Products, Maringá, Brazil) was placed over the specimen, and with the upper metallic part of the matrix, the material was compressed with a weight of 2 kg for 30 seconds to allow overflow and obtain a smooth surface [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of heat on the hardness of glass carbomer cement used in atraumatic restorative treatment

Hannegraf¹,

Ribeiro²,

Lopes³

et al. 2020

RSBO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of heat treatment on the microhardness of two glass ionomer cements: EQUIA Forte (GC Corporation) and GCP Glass Fill (GCPDental). Material and methods: Twenty specimens of the two glass ionomer cements were prepared following the manufacturer’s instructions, and 10 specimens of each material received heat treatment with a light curing unit (Carbo LED lamp, GCP-Dental). After seven days of storage in distilled water at room temperature (23°C), the 40 specimens were submitted for Vickers microhardness test (microhardness HMV 2T). Five indentations were performed on each specimen with a load of 100g, with a 10 second penetration time. Results: For both materials, the average microhardness value were higher in the groups that did not undergo heat treatment, the group presenting with the highest microhardness value was EQUIA Forte (GC Corporation) without heat treatment (125.3), and the lowest value was found for GCP Glass Fill (GCP-Dental) with heat treatment (72.9). Conclusion: The heat treatment had no influence on the microhardness of the glass ionomer cements tested.

show abstract

Análise da dureza de um novo material restaurador para ART: Glass Carbomer

Cited by 5 publications

References 16 publications

Fluoride release and surface roughness of a new glass ionomer cement: glass carbomer

Fluoride release and surface roughness of a new glass ionomer cement: glass carbomer

Avaliação de rugosidade, dureza e superfície dos cimentos de ionômero de vidro após diferentes sistemas de acabamento e polimento

Effect of heat on the hardness of glass carbomer cement used in atraumatic restorative treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About