Fluoride recharge of aesthetic dental materials

Abstract

The objective of the study was to compare the potential for fluoride recharge of two glass-ionomer cements, a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement, a compomer and a fluoride-containing composite in artificial saliva. Disc samples of each of the materials were placed into artificial saliva. The fluoride content of the artificial saliva was determined at various intervals up to 57 days. The discs were subjected to a 2 min exposure of NaF (500 parts/106). This recharge procedure was repeated at 64 and 120 days. The fluoride release was measured before and after recharge. The fluoride release for all of the materials increased after each exposure to NaF; however, the amount for the composite was very low. The resin-modified glass-ionomer cement displayed the greatest potential for fluoride recharge at 57 and 64 days (P<0.05). By 120 days, the amount of fluoride released in the 24 h post-recharge interval had decreased in all the materials. All the materials showed a potential for fluoride recharge. This effect, however, was minimal in the fluoride-containing composite.

Microleakage in class V composite and compomer restorations following exposure to a colutory prescribed for the treatment of xerostomy

“…An impermeable material can only absorb fl uoride into its immediate subsurface, whereas a completely permeable material can absorb ions deep into its bulk. 27 The results obtained in this study support this theory, given that the composites show low levels of permeability and the compomers show a higher level and thus a greater capacity for reabsorption of fl uoride. Furthermore, exposure to XeroLacer lasted 2 min, three times a day for 3 months, and fl uoride absorption may be more effective with frequent exposure.…”

“…23 Apart from XeroLacer's acidity, another factor that may contribute to the lower levels of microleakage with the compomer is the colutory's own fl uoride content, because compomers have a capacity for recharging themselves with fl uoride. 27 The quantity of fl uoride released by a restoration material generally decreases rapidly after the third day, and frequent external applications of fl uoride are necessary to maintain a satisfactory level of fl uoride release by the material. 28 The exact mechanism whereby the material takes in fl uoride is unknown, and various factors are probably involved.…”

Fluoride Release, Recharge and Mechanical Property Stability of Various Fluoride-containing Resin Composites

“…20,21 The hydrophobic nature of the resin matrices of the analyzed composites implicates the glass ionomer hydrogel of S-PRG particles as the key reason for the additional recharge demonstrated by Beautifil II compared with Tetric EvoCeram and Gradia Direct X. The hydrogel of S-PRG particles exhibits a higher permeability and porosity than resin matrices.…”

Fluoride release and recharge characteristics of denture base resins containing surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer filler

“…Studies into the anticariogenic effects of fluoridereleasing restorative materials have shown that fluoride is released from glass-ionomer cements [14][15][16][17][18][19][20] , resin modified glass-ionomer cements [17][18][19][20][21] and resin composite [20][21][22][23][24][25] . According to studies comparing the fluoride release and recharge properties of conventional glass ionomers and more recently developed fluoride-containing resin composite [20][21][22][23][24][25] , the amount of fluoride released from both these restorative materials was high during the first few days after immersion in DW, but dropped immediately thereafter [19][20][21] . In addition, Xu et al 18) reported that fluoride releasing ability could be restored by applying topical fluoride, and that materials with a high initial fluoride release rate Table 3 Amount of fluoride release in phase 3…”