A comparative evaluation of resin- and varnish-based surface protective agents on glass ionomer cement – a spectrophotometric analysis

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of resin-and varnish-based surface protective agents on Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC). The different surface protective agents used were: Vaseline V R , GC Fuji VARNISH TM (varnish), G-Coat Plus TM (resin) and EQUIA V R Coat (resin). Method: Thirty-six identical specimens of GIC were made. Six specimens were used in preparation of standard solution and remaining thirty were divided into five groups with six specimens in each group. Each test specimen was coated with one of the surface protecting agent except for the control group. The specimens were immersed separately into 1 ml of 0.05% methylene blue solution for 24 h and then rinsed with deionised water and further immersed into tubes containing 1 ml of 65% nitric acid. Specimens, once completely dissolved in nitric acid solution, were filtered and centrifuged. The supernatant was used to determine the absorbance using a spectrophotometer. The effectiveness of the surface protecting agents for the GIC was recorded in micrograms of dye per specimen, where low values indicate good protection. Result: Tukey HSD test revealed that GC Fuji VARNISH TM (varnish; mean ¼ 21.25 mg/ml), G-Coat Plus TM (resin; mean ¼ 30.39 mg/ml) and EQUIA V R Coat (resin; mean ¼ 9.32 mg/ml) were statistically not significantly different to each other and were effective in protecting the surface of GIC. Significance: The study found that there was a statistically significant difference between control and GC Fuji VARNISH TM , G-Coat Plus TM and EQUIA V R Coat. The three agents were found to be equally effective in protecting the surface of GIC.

Color Stability of Nano hybrid Composite and Acrylic Denture Teeth Exposed to Different Coloring Solutions

“…The NHC material includes, cross-linked inorganic macro fillers, micro fillers, and silicon dioxide in nanoscale size (28,29) . The development of micro filler-containing composites eliminated the problems related to the rough surface consistency also, highly discrete silicon dioxide with mean particle size of 40 nm, considered as suitable material for removing rough surfaces (30) . It can be observed that surface roughness showed a significant decrease for all tested samples among different solutions.…”

Effect of Nano-Coating on Microleakage of Different Capsulated Glass Ionomer Restoration in Primary Teeth: An In Vitro Study

“…In previous studies founds Fuji II LC (resin modified glass ionomer) without coating less microleakage than Fuji IX (conventional glass ionomer) without coating because resin-modified GIC (RMGIC) has resin monomers, like HEMA or Bis-GMA incorporated in its composition, making it higher flexural, compressive, and tensile strengths than conventional GICs (27,28,29) thus in this study the coating give improve to the Fuji IX become the same degree of microleakage to the Fuji II LC without coating.…”

Effect of varnish coating agent application on surface hardness of glass ionomer cement after immersion in carbonated drinks

“…19 Glass ionomer cement was manipulated according to the manufacturer's instructions using High Speed Mixer HSM3 for 10 seconds, then placed into the mold with capsule applier. 17,18,20 The restoration was covered with a mylar strip, a glass preparation, and a 200 g load for 7 minutes to ensure the initial hardening. 17,20,21 Excess material was removed using scalpel and blade.…”

“…15 Therefore, the use of coating agents, like varnishes, emollients, or resins is important to protect glass ionomer cement from acids. 4,16 Tyagi et al 17 , states that varnish is the most superior coating agent material in terms of cost with better protection capabilities than emollients and and has the same protection capability as resin at a higher price. Unfortunately many dentists neglected this procedure.…”