The dissolution mechanisms of silicate and glass-ionomer dental cements

Kuhn, A. T.; Wilson, Alan D.

doi:10.1016/0142-9612(85)90096-1

Cited by 79 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…32,33 Most of the fluoride is released as sodium fluoride, which is not critical to the cement matrix, and thus does not result in weakening or disintegration of the set cement. 34 Resin-modified GICs show similar A bonded specimen of a conventional glass ionomer cement to demineralized dentine. The 'acid-base resistant layer' can be observed at the interface (arrows).…”

Section: Fluoride Releasementioning

confidence: 99%

Adhesive restorative materials: A review

Tyas

Burrow

2004

Australian Dental Journal

151

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract'Adhesive' restorative dentistry originated with the work of Buonocore in 1955 in bonding resin to etched enamel. Since then, adhesive materials and techniques have developed at a rapid rate. The first chemically adhesive material (zinc polycarboxylate cement) was marketed in the late 1960s, and glassionomer cements and dentine bonding agents have since become available. This review focuses on the latter two products. Glass-ionomer cements have a particular role in adhesive dentistry because of their reliable chemical adhesion to enamel and dentine, and because of their apparent ability to promote the remineralization of 'affected' dentine. Dentine bonding agents have undergone marked changes in presentation over the last 15 years, but all have an essentially similar bonding system, that of hybrid layer formation. However, the most recent systems have limited clinical data supporting their use.

show abstract

Section: Fluoride Releasementioning

confidence: 99%

Adhesive restorative materials: A review

Tyas

Burrow

2004

Australian Dental Journal

151

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The fluoride release from a material is associated with the transport of fluoride ions, which is facilitated by a hydrophilic or ionic environment. But also factors like permeability, surface dissolution, and various intrinsic factors may govern the release of fluoride (14). The polymer matrix of compomers is modified by the presence of carboxylic groups, which render these materials hydrophilic to some degree.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term fluoride release from a glass ionomer cement, a compomer, and from experimental resin composites

Asmussen

Peutzfeldt

2002

Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aqueous phase of glass ionomer cements enables fluoride ions to diffuse and to be released from the material. The matrix of resin composites is much less hydrophilic, and fluoride incorporated in the material is only released in small amounts. It was the purpose of the present work to study the influence of resin matrix formulation on the fluoride release from experimental, fluoride-containing resin composites. The resin composites were based on methacrylate monomers and the adduct of maleic anhydride and HEMA (2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate). The resin composites contained 1 w% or 5 w% of AlF3*3H2O. A glass ionomer cement and a compomer were used as controls. Five disks of each material were stored in distilled water at room temperature. By means of a fluoride sensitive electrode, the fluoride release from disk-shaped specimens was determined periodically over 3 years. The glass ionomer cement released the most fluoride (1.54 +/- 4 microg/cm2 after 1 year and 248 +/- 7 microg/cm2 after 3 years). The compomer released relatively little fluoride during the 1st year (30 +/- 1 microg/cm2) but after this time the rate of fluoride release became equal to that of the glass ionomer cement, resulting in a release of 122 +/- 8 microg/cm2 after 3 years. Regarding the resin composites, the fluoride release increased with the hydrophilicity and the acid character of the polymer matrix. The release, however, was significantly lower than that from the glass ionomer cement and the compomer and ranged from 1.2 +/- 0.07 to 42 +/- 3.9 microg/cm2 at 1 year and from 2.3 +/- 0.16 to 79 +/- 6 microg/cm2 at 3 years.

show abstract

“…According to the equation, when the dissolution was controlled by the diffusion of the species in the cement matrix, n is equal to 0.5. When n is equal to 1, it can be stated that the dissolution controls both the diffusion and surface reaction, and the amount of elements eluted was then proportional to the reaction time 26) . As the erosion rates of Ca, Al and Si, in KTC in CA B solution were in between n=0.5-1.00, it is highly probable that solution reactions occurred by both diffusion and surface reaction 9,26) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When n is equal to 1, it can be stated that the dissolution controls both the diffusion and surface reaction, and the amount of elements eluted was then proportional to the reaction time 26) . As the erosion rates of Ca, Al and Si, in KTC in CA B solution were in between n=0.5-1.00, it is highly probable that solution reactions occurred by both diffusion and surface reaction 9,26) . Since other KTC and FP components had erosion rates of n<0.5 in AA B, LAB, CAB solutions, solution reactions were possibly only diffusion controlled.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In fact, erosion behaviour of cements should also consider the dissolution steps of surface wash-off, diffusion in the solid state and surface corrosion 26) . While Crisp et al 27) reported several elements eluted from glass-ionomer cements in a lactate buffer solution, Czarnecka et al 18) examined the mechanism for erosion in an acidic buffer solution and Fukazawa et al 9) in organic acid buffer solutions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The erosion kinetics of conventional and resin-modified glass-ionomer luting cements in acidic buffer solutions

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the erosion kinetics of conventional and resin-modified glass-ionomer luting cements in acidic buffer solutions as a function of time. Disc shaped specimens were prepared from conventional (Ketac-Cem: KTC) and resin-modified glass ionomer cements (Fuji Plus: FP) and immersed in three acidic buffer solutions (0.01 M) namely, acetic acid/sodium acetate (AA B ), lactic acid/ sodium lactate (LA B ) and citric acid/sodium citrate (CA B ) with a constant pH of 4.1 and stored for 1, 8, 24, 48, 80, 120 and 168 h. F concentration was determined using ion-specific electrode. Si, Ca and Al concentrations were determined by atomic absorption spectroscopy. Ca, Al, Si and F solubility rates in both FP and KTC were the highest in CA B solution. The erosion rates of both FP and KTC in all buffer solutions increased as a function of immersion time. The amount of F eluted from FP was more than that of KTC. The total amount of elements released from FP was less than KTC in all solutions.

show abstract

The dissolution mechanisms of silicate and glass-ionomer dental cements

Cited by 79 publications

References 18 publications

Adhesive restorative materials: A review

Adhesive restorative materials: A review

Long-term fluoride release from a glass ionomer cement, a compomer, and from experimental resin composites

The erosion kinetics of conventional and resin-modified glass-ionomer luting cements in acidic buffer solutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About