Effect of a self‐adhesive coating on the load‐bearing capacity of tooth‐coloured restorative materials

Bagheri, Rafat; Palamara, Joseph E.A.; Meşe, Ayşe; Manton, David J.

doi:10.1111/adj.12432

Cited by 21 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The immediate mechanical properties of GIC are known to be low, and even considered insufficient to withstand mastication forces, but they increase over time. 2 , 33 , 34 As already mentioned, GIC is susceptible to water content changing during the setting period, which can decrease the mechanical properties of this material, 7 , 22 including the FS values. 6 Therefore, to improve the initial FS and avoid the decrease in other mechanical properties, protecting the material's surface is advised.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Clinical wear of approximal glass ionomer restorations protected with a nanofilled self-adhesive light-cured protective coating

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High viscous glass ionomer cement (GIC) has gained popularity as a restorative material; however, high wear is pointed as one of the major drawbacks of this material. Protective surface coatings were developed to protect GIC from water contamination with the additional advantage of occluding any surface cracks or porosities commonly found in this material, possibly resulting in an increased wear resistance of the restorations.Objective:The objective of this study was to investigate the clinical wear of GIC approximal restorations in primary molars protected either with a nanofilled self-adhesive light-cured protective coating (NPC) or with petroleum jelly.Material and Methods:Approximal caries lesions in primary molars from 32 schoolchildren previously enrolled in another clinical trial were included in this investigation. GIC restorations were performed according to the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment approach and protected with either petroleum jelly or a NPC. Impressions of the restored hemiarch were done after 1 day and 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. The impressions were scanned in a 3-D appliance and the obtained images were superimposed using an appropriate computer software. Two-way ANOVA for repeated measures and Tukey's post-hoc test were used to analyze the wear of restorations (α=5%).Results:A significant difference was found between the two groups, with a wear protection offered by the application of a NPC. Conclusion: These results suggest that the application of a NPC has a protective effect on the clinical wear of approximal GIC restorations in primary teeth.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Clinical wear of approximal glass ionomer restorations protected with a nanofilled self-adhesive light-cured protective coating

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, early water exposure does not adversely affect the physical properties of these materials since the setting reaction is faster in HVGIC, unlike in conventional GIC 14 . Nonetheless, the manufacturer suggests that these materials should be applied with surface coating resins 15 . In 2007, a new HVGIC restorative system (EQUIA; GC Europe, Tokyo, Japan) was introduced, which could be an alternative to composite resins in the posterior region, and was designed for the use in the permanent restoration of Class I, II and V cavities by combining the advantages of HVGIC and a surface coating resin 13 , 16 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A randomized, prospective clinical study evaluating effectiveness of a bulk-fill composite resin, a conventional composite resin and a reinforced glass ionomer in Class II cavities: one-year results

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bulk-fill restorative materials such as bulk-fill composite resins and high viscous glass ionomer cements have become very popular materials in operative dentistry because their application is easy and time-saving. Objectives: The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a highly viscous reinforced glass ionomer material, a bulk-fill composite resin and a micro hybrid composite resin in Class II restorations. Methodology: In total, 109 Class II restorations were performed in 54 patients using three different restorative materials: Charisma Smart Composite (CSC); Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative (FBF); Equia Forte Fil (EF). Single Bond Universal adhesive (3M ESPE, Germany) was used with composite resin restorations. The restorations were evaluated using modified USPHS criteria in terms of retention, color match, marginal discoloration, anatomic form, contact point, marginal adaptation, secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity and surface texture. The data were analyzed using Chi-Square, Fischer's and McNemar's tests. Results: At the end of one year, 103 restorations were followed up. No changes were observed during the first 6 months. At the end of one year, there were small changes in composite restorations (FBF and CSC) but no statistically significant difference was observed between the clinical performances of these materials for all criteria (p>0.05). However, there was a statistically significant difference between EF, FBF and CSC groups in all parameters except marginal discoloration, secondary caries and postoperative sensitivity in one-year evaluation (p<0.05). Conclusion: Bulk-fill composite resins and conventional composite resins showed more successful clinical performance than highly viscous reinforced glass ionomers in Class II cavities.

show abstract

“…Infiltration of such self-adhesive coatings has been claimed to protect the material itself against crack initiation by filling the porosities, both of which could reinforce the materials, especially in the case of GICs. Its protective effect against extrinsic water may also allow complete maturation of the GIC reaction with delayed water exposure [22,23]. In this study, the specimens were not stored for 24 h before polishing and SC application.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microleakage of high viscosity glass-ionomer and glass-carbomer with and without coating before and after hydrothermal aging

Münevveroğlu

Özsoy

Akgöl

et al. 2019

BDS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the microleakage patterns of GIC and GGC with and without their protective surface coatings on enamel and dentin margins before and after aging. Material and Methods: Two rectangular cavities (height: 2 mm; width: 3 mm; depth: 1.5 mm) were prepared on each tooth at the cemento-enamel junction were prepared on human permanent molars (N=56) and the teeth were randomly assigned to be restored with one of the following: a) high viscosity glass-ionomer cement (GIC) (EQUIA Fil, C Corp., Tokyo, Japan) (n=28), b) glass-carbomer cement (GCC) (Glass Carbomer Products, Leiden, The Netherlands) (n=28). Half of the teeth were further divided into two groups where one group received protective surface coating (SC) (G-Coat Plus, GC Corp) (n=14) and the other group did not (n=14). Half of the teeth were stored for 24 hours (n=7), and the other half was thermocycled (5000 cycles, 5-55°C) (n=7). For microleakage analysis, the teeth were immersed in 5% methylene blue dye for 24 hours, sectioned into two equal halves. Microleakage patterns were evaluated using stereomicroscope and scored on a scale of 0-3 (0: No dye penetration, 1: Dye penetration less than half of the axial wall, 2: Dye penetration more than half the axial wall, 3: Dye penetration spreading along the axial wall). Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis tests at the significance level of 0.05. Results: Compared to 24 h storage, after thermocycling, surface coating on GIC decreased microleakage significantly compared to GCC (p=0.046) but not for GCC. In the thermocycled groups, coated GIC showed significantly less leakage at the enamel margin but no significant difference was found with both GIC and GCC in the dentin margins. Conclusion: The application of surface coating significantly reduced the microleakage scores of GIC but not GCC, within the enamel margins only.KeywordsGlass-carbomer; Glass-ionomer; Microleakage.

show abstract

Effect of a self‐adhesive coating on the load‐bearing capacity of tooth‐coloured restorative materials

Abstract: The load-bearing capacity of the restorative materials was affected by applying self-adhesive coating and ageing. The CGIC had significantly higher hardness but lower flexural strength than the RM-GIC and RC.

Cited by 21 publications

References 22 publications

Clinical wear of approximal glass ionomer restorations protected with a nanofilled self-adhesive light-cured protective coating

Clinical wear of approximal glass ionomer restorations protected with a nanofilled self-adhesive light-cured protective coating

A randomized, prospective clinical study evaluating effectiveness of a bulk-fill composite resin, a conventional composite resin and a reinforced glass ionomer in Class II cavities: one-year results

Microleakage of high viscosity glass-ionomer and glass-carbomer with and without coating before and after hydrothermal aging

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About