In vitro biocompatibility of hydroxyapatite‐added GIC: An SEM study using human periodontal ligament fibroblasts

Thomas, Betsy; Gupta, Kunal

doi:10.1111/jerd.12317

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several methodologies have been applied to evaluate the biological compatibility of dental materials (19), including the response of subcutaneous connective tissue after implantation in animal models. This methodology is based mainly on the evaluation of the tissue reaction, emphasizing the characteristics of collagen fibers and inflammatory infiltrate by using qualitative and quantitative analyses (15,20).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tissue Response after Subcutaneous Implantation of Different Glass Ionomer-Based Cements

Pucinelli

Borges

et al. 2019

Braz. Dent. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the subcutaneous connective tissue response of isogenic mice after implantation of different glass ionomer-based cements (EQUIA® Forte Fil, EQUIA® Fil and Ketac™ Universal Aplicap™). Eighty-seven isogenic BALB/c mice were allocated in 12 groups, 9 were considered as experimental groups (Ketac, E. Fil and E. Forte at 7, 21 and 63 days) and 3 controls (empty polyethylene tubes at 7, 21 and 63 days). After the experimental periods, the subcutaneous connective tissue surrounding the implanted material was removed and subjected to histotechnical processing and staining with hematoxylin and eosin. A histopathological description of the tissue reaction surrounding each material and a semi-quantitative analysis of collagen fiber formation and inflammatory infiltrate were performed. Additionally, the thickness of the granulomatous tissue in contact with each material was measured. Data were analyzed statistically (α=0.05) by the Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by Dunn post-test. Initially, the collagen fiber formation was not different among all the tested materials (p>0.05) but was different at 21 days with the control group presenting the most advanced stage of collagen fiber formation. At 63 days, EQUIA® Forte Fil group showed the most advanced stage of collagen fiber formation, compared to EQUIA® Fil group (p<0.05). The inflammatory infiltrate was not different among the tested materials in any experimental period (p>0.05). The thickness of the granulomatous tissue was greater in the E. Forte group, compared to control in all periods. All glass ionomer-based cements showed tissue compatibility, according to the evaluated parameters.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tissue Response after Subcutaneous Implantation of Different Glass Ionomer-Based Cements

Pucinelli

Borges

et al. 2019

Braz. Dent. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Điều kiện ngâm mẫu cũng ảnh hưởng nhiều đến khả năng giải phóng fluoride của vật liệu GIC. Trường hợp mẫu không thay dung dịch ngâm trong suốt thời gian khảo sát cho kết quả thấp hơn, vật liệu GIC giải phóng ít F − hơn, có thể khi hàm lượng F − giải phóng ra môi trường ngoài tích lũy theo thời gian, làm giảm chênh lệch nồng độ dẫn đến giảm sự khuếch tán; ngoài ra, có thể xảy ra sự tái hấp thu fluoride trong vật liệu GIC do ion F − kích thước rất nhỏ nên có thể di chuyển tự do vào và ra khỏi xi măng đóng rắn mà không làm hòa tan hoặc đứt mạch [18].…”

Section: E Kết Quả Giải Phóng Fluoride Các Mẫu Gicunclassified

Characteristic of Glass Ionomer Cement Material for Clinical Dentistry

Huynh

Minh

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glass ionomer cement (GIC), a thermoplastic polymer, is toughed by ionic bonding is used in dentistry as a filling material. The glass-powder used has some disadvantages such as: poor strength and toughness, and instability in water. Therefore, the aim of this work is to enhance mechanical and fluoride release properties of the GICs by modifying ingredients. The results show that the compressive strength reached to from 60.5 to 86.2 MPa, the setting time met the ISO 9917-1:2007 quality standard. This also suggests that, in addition to 35% PAA in water with Mw of 100,000, 5% of Maleic acid and 5% Tartaric acid to produce GIC which can be used as suitable materials for improving its fluoride ion release over 28 days. The average diameter (dmean) of glass powder for GICs was 14.3 mm; S.P. Surface area was 10,358 cm2=cm3, improvement of liquid composition includes 35% PAA in water with Mw of 100,000, 5% of Maleic acid and 5% Tartaric acid. The compressive strength after curing 28-day reaches from 60.5 to 86.2 MPa and the setting time responds with ISO 9917-1:2007. In conclusion, it was found that the GIC can release fluoride ions (F-) for the during of the examination period.

show abstract

“…One of the main disadvantages of this type of material is related to their poor mechanical and aesthetic properties [ 11 ]. As such, their application is partially limited to use as liners [ 29 ] and sealing material [ 30 ], for periorestoration [ 31 ], cementing of glass fiber posts [ 11 ], to bond orthodontic brackets to tooth surfaces or cement orthodontic bands [ 32 , 33 ], as a fissure sealant for high-risk caries [ 34 ], or even as bulk material in cavities [ 35 ]. GICs are also recommended to be used as restoration material for permanent teeth in atraumatic treatments [ 36 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incorporation of Nanomaterials in Glass Ionomer Cements—Recent Developments and Future Perspectives: A Narrative Review

Fierăscu

2022

Nanomaterials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glass ionomer cements (GICs), restorative materials with commercial availability spanning over five decades, are widely applied due to their advantages (including bio-compatibility, fluoride release, or excellent bonding properties). However, GICs have shortcomings. Among the disadvantages limiting the application of GICs, the poor mechanical properties are the most significant. In order to enhance the mechanical or antimicrobial properties of these materials, the addition of nanomaterials represents a viable approach. The present paper aims to review the literature on the application of different types of nanomaterials for the enhancement of GICs’ mechanical and antimicrobial properties, which could lead to several clinical benefits, including better physical properties and the prevention of tooth decay. After applying the described methodology, representative articles published in the time period 2011-present were selected and included in the final review, covering the modification of GICs with metallic nanoparticles (Cu, Ag), metallic and metalloid oxide nanoparticles (TiO2, ZnO, MgO, Al2O3, ZrO2, SiO2), apatitic nanomaterials, and other nanomaterials or multi-component nanocomposites.

show abstract

In vitro biocompatibility of hydroxyapatite‐added GIC: An SEM study using human periodontal ligament fibroblasts

Cited by 5 publications

References 34 publications

Tissue Response after Subcutaneous Implantation of Different Glass Ionomer-Based Cements

Tissue Response after Subcutaneous Implantation of Different Glass Ionomer-Based Cements

Characteristic of Glass Ionomer Cement Material for Clinical Dentistry

Incorporation of Nanomaterials in Glass Ionomer Cements—Recent Developments and Future Perspectives: A Narrative Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About