Wear and superficial roughness of glass ionomer cements used as sealants, after simulated toothbrushing

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate, in vitro, the properties (wear and roughness) of glass ionomer cements that could influence their indication as pit and fissure sealants. The utilized materials were Fuji Plus, Ketac-Molar and Vitremer (in two different proportions: 1:1 and :1). The resin-based sealant Delton was used as control. By means of an electronic balance (precision of 10-4 g), wear was measured in function of weight loss after simulated toothbrushing. Superficial roughness was determined by means of a surface roughness-measuring apparatus. The results revealed that diluted Vitremer and Fuji Plus were less resistant to toothbrushing abrasion and had the greatest increase in superficial roughness. Although in clinical situations luting or diluted ionomer cements are often utilized as alternatives to resin-based sealants, the resultsof this study revealed that the properties of those cements are worse than those of restorative ionomers, whichpresented results similar to those of the evaluated resin sealant.

Physicomechanical properties of a zinc-reinforced glass ionomer restorative material

“…Abrasive wear did not significantly differ among the GICs tested in the present study, which confirms the findings of previous investigations (15,23). However, the abrasive wear of all GICs was significantly or marginally greater than the values noted in the tested nanofilled hybrid composite (Premise).…”

“…The surfaces of carefully polished dental restorations can be compromised by subsequent home care, including toothbrushing. Most studies of the effects of toothbrushing and polishing on dental restorations concluded that restoration surfaces are smoother before polishing or toothbrushing and tend to increase in roughness afterward (10,15,25,26).…”

“…56, No. 1, [11][12][13][14][15][16]2014 Original Physicomechanical properties of a zinc-reinforced glass ionomer restorative material material (ChemFil Rock, Dentsply Caulk) was recently introduced to improve flexural strength (6), hardness, wear resistance, and fracture toughness. However, few studies have evaluated these properties.…”

Evaluation of the roughness and mass loss of the flowable composites after simulated toothbrushing abrasion

“…Besides the wear produced by abrasion, there are other types of wear generated by corrosion and fatigue 1 . A clinical evaluation of these materials is a difficult task, since some factors such as dietary habits and chewing forces might influence the results 1,9,16 . In the present study, the wear of flowable resin composites was tested by toothbrushing simulation.…”

“…Depending on the degree of wear, a restoration can fail due to two main reasons: submargination 19 or changes in surface roughness 12 . Even though toothbrushing plays an important role in oral hygiene, its continuing action might cause some damage to the surface of teeth 1,4,6,7,8,9,16,19 , and Class V resin composite restorations are a good example of this scenario. Wear or surface alterations caused by regular toothbrushing may affect the material roughness, making it more prone to plaque accumulation, and soft tissues inflammation 14 .…”