Fluoride Release and Recharging Ability of Glass Ionomer Cement Incorporating Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles

Mahmoud, Nermin; Metwally, Asmaa A

doi:10.21608/edj.2021.89027.1732

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The hydrothermal method enables the synthesis of a highly porous hydroxyapatite [36]. Mahmoud et al [37] incorporated nanohydroxyapatite into GIC by mixing the hydrothermally derived nanohydroxyapatite powder with glass ionomer powder with a plastic spatula on a glass slab. Then, the powder mixture was mixed again by amalgamator for 10 s to allow even distribution of nanohydroxyapatite particles before the liquid polyacid is added to the powder mixture and later the cement mixture was transferred to a mold to set.…”

Section: Hydrothermal Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…GIC suffers from poor resistance to wear. Mahmoud et al [37] evaluated the wear rate of GIC incorporated with nanohydroxyapatite after immersing the cement samples in artificial saliva. The results revealed that the addition of nanohydroxyapatite enhanced the wear resistance of GIC.…”

Section: Effects Of Incorporating Nanohydroxyapatite Into Glass Ionom...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The results concluded that the addition of nanohydroxyapatite enhanced the microhardness of GIC compared to microhydroxyapatite. Microhardness of GIC reinforced with nanohydroxyapatite was studied by Masaeli et al [37] using a Long-term Vickers microhardness test at time points of 1 h, 24 h, 1, 2, 3 and 11 weeks. Based on the results, GIC added with nanohydroxyapatite showed a decrease in microhardness compared to the GIC only samples.…”

Section: Microhardnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of Nanohydroxyapatite Incorporation into Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glass ionomer cement (GIC) or polyalkenoate cement is a water-based cement that is commonly used in clinical dentistry procedures as a restorative material. It exhibits great properties such as fluoride-ion release, good biocompatibility, ease of use and great osteoconductive properties. However, GIC’s low mechanical properties have become a major drawback, limiting the cement’s usage, especially in high stress-bearing areas. Nanohydroxyapatite, which is a biologically active phosphate ceramic, is added as a specific filler into glass ionomer cement to improve its properties. In this review, it is shown that incorporating hydroxyapatite nanoparticles (nHA) into GIC has been proven to exhibit better physical properties, such as increasing the compressive strength and fracture toughness. It has also been shown that the addition of nanohydroxyapatite into GIC reduces cytotoxicity and microleakage, whilst heightening its fluoride ion release and antibacterial properties. This review aims to provide a brief overview of the recent studies elucidating their recommendations which are linked to the benefits of incorporating hydroxyapatite nanoparticles into glass ionomer cement.

show abstract

Section: Hydrothermal Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Effects Of Incorporating Nanohydroxyapatite Into Glass Ionom...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Microhardnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Nanohydroxyapatite Incorporation into Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As previously mentioned, a study on the impact of 1–3% pure nano- or micro-silica on the microhardness of Fuji II ® (GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), a conventional GIC, was found to improve Knoop hardness values at 24 h. No other reports on the effect of pure nano- or micro-silica on the microhardness of conventional GICs could be found, for comparison, in the current scientific literature. However, other metal and metal oxide INPs (e.g., Ag, MgSiO 4 , TiO 2 , Ca 5 (PO 4 ) 3 OH) are reported to enhance microhardness [ 15 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 ], whilst some (e.g., Ag, nanoclay) are indicated to have no effect [ 17 , 52 ], and others (e.g., BaSO 4 , YbF 3 , TiO 2 , ZnO, Ca 5 (PO 4 ) 3 OH) are noted to diminish this property [ 9 , 42 , 43 , 48 , 53 , 54 ]. As with setting time, discrepancies exist between the reported impact on microhardness of certain INPs (e.g., Ag, Ca 5 (PO 4 ) 3 OH, TiO 2 ) that, in all probability, derive from the surface properties, reactivity and concentration of the INPs; the formulation of the GICs; and the highly variable, non-standardized experimental parameters that have been employed to determine this property.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Nano- and Micro-Silica on the Setting Time and Microhardness of Conventional Glass–Ionomer Cements

Güçlü,

Patat,

Coleman

2024

Dentistry Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of the incorporation of 2, 4 or 6 wt% of amorphous nano- or micro-silica (Aerosil® OX 50 or Aeroperl® 300 Pharma (Evonik Operations GmbH, Essen, Germany), respectively) on the net setting time and microhardness of Ketac™ Molar (3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) and Fuji IX GP® (GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) glass–ionomer cements (GICs) (viz. KM and FIX, respectively). Both silica particles were found to cause a non-linear, dose-dependent reduction in setting time that was within the clinically acceptable limits specified in the relevant international standard (ISO 9917-1:2007). The microhardness of KM was statistically unaffected by blending with 2 or 4 wt% nano-silica at all times, whereas 6 wt% addition decreased and increased the surface hardness at 1 and 21 days, respectively. The incorporation of 4 or 6 wt% nano-silica significantly improved the microhardness of FIX at 1, 14 and 21 days, with no change in this property noted for 2 wt% addition. Micro-silica also tended to enhance the microhardness of FIX, at all concentrations and times, to an extent that became statistically significant for all dosages at 21 days. Conversely, 4 and 6 wt% additions of micro-silica markedly decreased the initial 1-day microhardness of KM, and the 21-day sample blended at 4 wt% was the only specimen that demonstrated a significant increase in this property. Scanning electron microscopy indicated that the nano- and micro-silica particles were well distributed throughout the composite structures of both GICs with no evidence of aggregation or zoning. The specific mechanisms of the interaction of inorganic nanoparticles with the constituents of GICs require further understanding, and a lack of international standardization of the determination of microhardness is problematic in this respect.

show abstract