Fluoride release and uptake by glass ionomers

Forsten, L

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0722.1991.tb01891.x

Cited by 108 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…23 To compare the present data with the results from other papers [24][25][26][27][28] involving a similar range of materials, the same unit (ppm) was chosen for comparison and discussion. The treatment of data by Rothwell et al 29 using mg/g for fluoride release versus the square root of time, assumes that fluoride release will be completely exhausted at infinity, and has gradually gained acceptance for recent publications of fluoride release.…”

Section: Researchmentioning

confidence: 67%

Fluoride release, weight loss and erosive wear of modern aesthetic restoratives

1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

265 RESEARCHrestorative dentistry limited the scope of conventional GICs in clinical application. More recently-introduced resin ionomers have less water sensitivity, and improved aesthetic and mechanical properties. 11 However, there are great differences between various materials in the levels of fluoride released, 12 and there is also less fluoride released when artificial 13 and human saliva 14 are used, rather than deionised water. Some materials claimed by their manufacturers to release fluoride hardly do so in measurable quantities. 15 In fact, a variety of such fluoride-releasing materials are primarily resin-composite systems with some form of fluoride incorporated into the resin matrix. 16 Most of these materials have a lower level of fluoride release than GICs, and their clinical effectiveness is also unknown.Therefore, the objectives of this study were to investigate the long-term levels of fluoride released from selected GICs and resin ionomers, and the effects of acidulated phosphate fluoride (APF) gel on the levels of fluoride released and on the physical structure of the glass ionomer cements, by monitoring their weights and surface changes. Materials and methods Restorative materialsThe details of the materials investigated in the present study are listed in Table 1. ChemFil Superior was the positive control and Z100 was the negative control. Specimen preparation and immersionFive specimens of each material were prepared according to the manufacturers' instructions and placed into disposable, cylindrical Teflon moulds (3.0 mm diameter × 2.7 mm height), 17 and then pressed between two Mylar-covered glass slides. The resin ionomer cements were light cured from both ends of the moulds for 40 seconds using a VCL 200 visible light unit (Demetron Research Corporation, Danbury, CT, USA). They were allowed to set for about an hour. After setting, each specimen was removed from its mould, weighed by an electronic balance, then placed in a polypropylene vial with 2 mL of artificial saliva (0.05 M acetate buffer with 2.2 mM CaHPO 4 adjusted with glacial acetic acid to pH 5.0) and stored at 37°C. The solution was replaced at 6 hours, 1 day and 2 days, then weekly for 12 weeks. The amount of fluoride released was also measured at these same times for the first 5 weeks, then at 8 weeks and 12 weeks. Each specimen was dabbed dry before weighing at the times of solution replacement. Determination of fluorideOne mL of the solution was mixed with 0.1 mL of TISAB III solution and the fluoride concentration was measured with a specific fluoride electrode (Orion 9609BN electrode: Orion Research Incorporated, Boston, MA, USA) and read in millivolts. Calibration of the fluoride electrode was done before each measurement session Objective In this investigation, the in vitro sustained fluoride release, weight loss and erosive wear of three conventional glass ionomer cements (Fuji IX, ChemFil Superior, Ketac-Silver), three resin-modified glass ionomer cements (Fuji II LC, Vitremer, Photac-Fil), a polyacid-modified resin ...

show abstract

Section: Researchmentioning

confidence: 67%

Fluoride release, weight loss and erosive wear of modern aesthetic restoratives

1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, glass ionomer cement acts as a rechargeable device for fluoride release [7]. This capability has already been demonstrated by previous studies indicating that the regular use of toothpaste may result in the absorption of fluoride into the glass ionomer cement and subsequent release to the tooth structure [8,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Evaluation of Fluoride Release, pH and Microhardness of Glass Ionomer Cements

Cardoso¹,

Leitão²,

Neto³

et al. 2015

Pesqui. bras. odontopediatria clín. integr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate fluoride release, pH and microhardness of glass ionomer cements (GIC). Material and Methods: Four different cements: Vidrion ® R (G1), Vitro Fil ® (G2), Maxxion ® (G3) and Magic Glass ® (G4) and a composite resin (G5 -control group) comprised the sample. Thirty specimens were manufactured (10 mm x 3 mm) and stored in deionized water. Analyses were performed after 24 hours, 7 days and 28 days. The following devices were used for measurements: fluorometer, pH meter and microhardness tester. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney, Friedman and Wilcoxon tests (α = 0.05) using the SPSS ® software (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) version 17. Results: GICs were able to release fluoride; however, the amount released decreased with increasing immersion time (p <0.002). The pH of all products increased over time, the lowest value was identified for Magic Glass (5.93) and the highest for Maxxion (6.94) at time of 24 h. Materials showed significant decrease in surface microhardness, especially G4 for presenting the lowest recorded values (p <0.05). Conclusion: GICs are fluoride-releasing restorative materials with pH favorable to oral homeostasis and good mechanical behavior.

show abstract

“…[10][11][12][13][14] These materials will bond to enamel and dentine and leach fluoride. 15 The strongly radiopaque, silvercontaining, glass ionomers 16 have become popular although it is suggested that the occlusal access cavity should be sealed with composite resin to prevent wear of the underlying glass ionomer. 10,12 The efficacy of caries removal is perhaps a cause for concern bearing in mind the limited access afforded by the preparation.…”

Section: The Development Of the Tunnel Restorationmentioning

confidence: 99%