Effects of Temperature on the Fluoride Release and Recharging Ability of Glass Ionomers

Yan, Zhuoqun; Sidhu, Sharanbir K.; Mahmoud, Ghiath; Carrick, TE; McCabe, J F

doi:10.2341/06-36

Cited by 18 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 14 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The pattern of recharge for the conventional glass ionomers after a sharp rise followed by a rapid decline and then gradual prolonged release which are similar to those reported in other studies[21–24] except for the data reported by Rao et al ., indicating no significant rechargability for Fuji VII for up to 30 days after exposure to a 1000 ppm fluorinated dentifrice. [25] All the tested materials reacted positively to exposure to external fluoride source.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Recharge pattern of contemporary glass ionomer restoratives

Arbabzadeh-Zavareh¹,

Gibbs²,

Meyers³

et al. 2012

Dent Res J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:As glass ionomers have the ability to reload fluoride from outside sources, the aim was to compare the recharge pattern of six glass ionomer cements after exposure to fluoride.Materials and Methods:Fuji VII, Fuji IX, Riva Pink, Riva Bleach, Ketac Fil and Fuji IX Extra were investigated. The fluoride-containing materials used were tooth paste and mouth wash (Colgate). Specimens of each material (n=15) were immersed separately in deionized water for 59 days. Then the samples of each material were divided into three groups of five each. Two groups were recharged for 2, 20 and 60 min daily during three consecutive weekly intervals and then no treatment for one week. The third group was used as control. Fluoride release measurements (μg/cm2/day) were made in every 24 h. One-way and repeated measures analysis of variance tests were used.Results:Tooth paste recharged materials showed higher level of recharge. On day 1, the difference of fluoride release from different treatment groups of different materials except for Fuji IX Extra were not significant (P>0.05). On days 7 and 14, the differences observed were significant (P<0.05) for all materials except for Fuji VII (tooth paste versus mouth wash) and Trial Fuji IX (mouth wash versus control) and on day 14 for Rvia Pink (mouth wash versus control). On days 21 and 28, the differences observed were significant for all the materials (P<0.05) except for Riva Pink (toothpaste versus mouth wash), Riva Bleach, Ketac Fil and Trial FujiI X (mouth wash versus control) on day 28.Conclusion:A time tabled schedule of application of fluoride-containing materials could help to achieve high fluoride release.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Recharge pattern of contemporary glass ionomer restoratives

Arbabzadeh-Zavareh¹,

Gibbs²,

Meyers³

et al. 2012

Dent Res J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7 However, sensitivity to moisture contamination interferes with the initial setting of self-cured GIC. In addition, conventional GICs are relatively unaesthetic and have poorer mechanical properties than resin composites, 8 which might impair the long-term treatment of DH. In fact, resin-modified glass ionomer cements have been developed to overcome the disadvantages of conventional GIC.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies reported that the effects of several desensitizing agents were not permanent because they did not properly adhere to the dentin surface. 6,8,13 However, a limited amount of data on the efficacy of desensitizers is available in the literature, especially for long-term assessments of at least 6-months follow-up. 2,4,18,19 Therefore, current randomized, split-mouth clinical trial evaluates and compares the desensitizing efficacy of Clinpro XT and conventional GIC (Vidrion R) in a 6-month follow-up.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of dentin hypersensitivity treatment with glass ionomer cements: A randomized clinical trial

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A randomized, double-blind, split-mouth clinical trial was performed compared the desensitizing efficacy of the resin-modified glass ionomer cement (GIC) ClinproTM XT (3M ESPE, Minnesota, USA) and the conventional GIC Vidrion R (SS White, Gloucester, UK) in a 6-month follow-up. Subjects were required to have at least two teeth with dentin hypersensitivity. Teeth were divided at random into 2 groups, one group received Clinpro XT and the other conventional GIC Vidrion R. Treatments were assessed by tactile and air blast tests using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at baseline, after 20 minutes, and at 7, 15, 21, 30, 90 and 180 days post-treatment. Twenty subjects (152 teeth) were included. Both tests (tactile and air blast) showed a significant reduction of dentin hypersensitivity immediately after the application of Vidrion R and Clinpro XT (20 min). VAS scores obtained along the 6-month follow-up were statistically lower when compared to initial rates (p < 0.05). Both GIC were able to reduce dentin hypersensitivity up to 6-month post-treatment period without statistically significant differences among them (p > 0.05). Both cements provided satisfactory results in long-term dental sensitivity reduction.

show abstract

“…It has been reported that the release of fluoride ions from glass ionomer cements continued for longer than a year [25]. Furthermore, the fluoride-releasing ability of glass ionomer cements may be regenerated or recharged by the use of solutions of high fluoride concentration, such as mouth rinses and topical applications [26][27][28][29], and the discoloration effect thus may last a long time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%