A comparison of fluoride release from three glass ionomer cements and a polycarboxylate cement

Meryon, S.D.; Smith, Audrey

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2591.1984.tb00373.x

Cited by 45 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The high release o f fluoride obtained in the first 24 h is in agreement with previous studies [Crisp et al, 1980: Mcryon andSmith. 1984;HI Mallakh and Sarkar, 1990], The level of release dropped rapidly after 48 h and had almost plateaued by the 10th day.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…Although these materials have inferior mechanical proper ties to other restorative materials, their use is being advocat ed because of their potential anticaries benefits to the ad jacent dental hard tissues. Many in vitro studies [Meryon andSmith, 1984: Wilson ct ah. 1985;HI Mallakh and Sarkar, 1990] have shown that fluoride is released from these mate rials with the maximum fluoride release within the 1st day immediately following setting of the material, falling to a plateau after several weeks.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fluoride Uptake and Release Characteristics of Glass lonomer Cements

Creanor¹,

Carruthers²,

Saunders³

et al. 1994

Caries Res

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this study were firstly to investigate the fluoride-releasing characteristics of five commercial glass ionomer materials: Ketac Fil, Chemfil Superior, Fuji II LC, Aquacem and Vitrebond. The second aim was to assess the fluoride uptake and subsequent release from the same range of materials. In both tests, ten discs, 6 mm in diameter with a thickness of 1.5 mm, were made for each material. The initial fluoride release was assessed over a 60-day period for all materials. Each disc was immersed in 2 ml of de-ionised water within a plastic vial. The solutions were changed daily up to day 15, and thereafter every 3 and 4 days until the end of the test. All of the materials released measurable amounts of fluoride throughout the test period, with a considerable range on day 1 (15.3–155.2 ppm F). The concentration of fluoride released on the 2nd day fell sharply for all materials (range 6.3–44.3 ppm F). By day 60 all materials continued to release fluoride, albeit to a lesser extent (range 0.9–3.99 ppm F). With regard to the uptake and release of fluoride, a similar protocol was employed, although all samples were immersed in 1 litre of de-ionised water for 60 days to allow the majority of the fluoride to leach out from the materials. The ten pellets for each material were divided into two groups, five samples as control and five samples as test. Each day over a 20-day period all test samples were exposed to a 1000-ppm F solution for 2 min. Fluoride uptake/release was assessed from the 2 ml of de-ionised water in which the samples had been immersed for 24 h. The control samples continued to release small concentrations of fluoride throughout the test. The test samples, exposed to the 1000-ppm F solution, consistently released more ionic fluoride than the controls at all time points from day 1 to day 20, indicating that fluoride had been taken up and subsequently released. The values ranged at day 1 from 3.29 ( ± 0.14) for Aquacem to 7.63 ( ± 0.13) for Ketac Fil at day 1, rising to values between 869 ( ± 1.88) for Aquacem to 10.34 ( ± 1.61) for Vitrebond at day 20. This study indicates that all five glass ionomer cements take up as well as release fluoride and that the amount of fluoride released may be of profound clinical significance.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Fluoride Uptake and Release Characteristics of Glass lonomer Cements

Creanor¹,

Carruthers²,

Saunders³

et al. 1994

Caries Res

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, Meryon and Smith 38) concluded that fluoride released from GIC is not from the GIC core but rather from the matrix. In our study, XPS analysis showed that fluorine contents in the matrices of the A100-and A100f-GICs were higher than in the matrix of the A200-GIC, and that the fluorine content of the A200-GIC was lower than that of the control-GIC.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydroxyapatite particle characteristics influence the enhancement of the mechanical and chemical properties of conventional restorative glassionomer cement

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this study were to improve the mechanical and chemical properties of conventional restorative glass ionomer cement (GIC) by adding hydroxyapatite (HAp) preparations with different characteristics, and to investigate the underlying reaction mechanisms. Fuji IX GP ® was used as the control GIC. The experimental GICs consisted of four HAp-particles with different characteristics added at 8 mass% to Fuji IX-powder. All cements were prepared by mixing with Fuji IX-liquid (P/L=3.6). Four HApparticles were analyzed, and then the mechanical strengths and the fluoride-ion-release-recharge-behaviors of five GIC groups were evaluated. The results of this study demonstrate that the addition of HAp particles with highly reactive properties such as high specific surface area can enhance the flexural strength and fluoride ion release properties of conventional restorative GIC. Our results further indicate that HAp functions as an adsorbent and an ion exchangeable agent, resulting in improved mechanical and chemical properties of GIC.

show abstract

“…Therefore, careful oral hygiene and a fluoride preventive program are recommended. Glass ionomer cements release fluoride to saliva and surrounding tooth structures [Swartz et al, 1980[Swartz et al, , 1984Meryon and Smith, 1984;Retief et al, 1984], Used as an alternative to composite for cementation of bands and brackets, glass ionomer cement acts as a slow-release system for fluoride. An advantage might be that the released fluoride then exerts a local cariostatic effect at the sites where the caries challenge is •ncreased during orthodontic treatment.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Salivary Fluoride Concentrations in Children with Glass Ionomer Cemented Orthodontic Appliances

Hallgren

Oliveby²,

Twetman

1990

Caries Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Salivary fluoride concentrations were determined in 10 children (mean age 12.0 years) undergoing fixed orthodontic therapy. The orthodontic appliances, a minimum of 4 bands and 8 brackets, were cemented with a glass ionomer cement. Unstimulated whole saliva was collected 4 times a day before (baseline value) and at 1, 7, 14 and 28 days after cementation. The samples of saliva were centrifuged and the supernatants were analyzed with a fluoride-sensitive electrode. At baseline, the mean salivary fluoride concentration was 0.85 μmol/l. There was a significant increase during the day after cementation (1.88 μmol/l). After 7, 14 and 28 days, salivary fluoride levels were slightly elevated, but not statistically different from the baseline values. The ingested fluoride dose during the 1st day was estimated to be 0.02 mg. It is concluded that in orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances, a slow release of fluoride from glass ionomer cements could exert a local cariostatic effect on adjacent caries-susceptible enamel.

show abstract

A comparison of fluoride release from three glass ionomer cements and a polycarboxylate cement

Cited by 45 publications

References 21 publications

Fluoride Uptake and Release Characteristics of Glass lonomer Cements

Fluoride Uptake and Release Characteristics of Glass lonomer Cements

Hydroxyapatite particle characteristics influence the enhancement of the mechanical and chemical properties of conventional restorative glassionomer cement

Salivary Fluoride Concentrations in Children with Glass Ionomer Cemented Orthodontic Appliances

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About