<p>The Effects of Silver, Zinc Oxide, and Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticles Used as Dentin Pretreatments on the Microshear Bond Strength of a Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement to Dentin</p>

Abstract

Aim This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of three nanoparticle solutions used as dentin pretreatments on the microshear bond strength (µSBS) of a conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC) to dentin. Materials and Methods Ninety intact human molars were used after sectioning their occlusal surfaces to expose flat dentin surfaces. The specimens were randomly assigned to nine groups (n = 10). Group A was the control group (without using the cavity disinfectant). In groups B, C, D, and E, the prepared dentin surfaces were treated with 1 cc 2% chlorhexidine (CHX), 0.1% silver nanoparticle (SNP), 0.1% titanium dioxide nanoparticle (TNP), and 0.1% zinc oxide nanoparticle (ZNP) solutions for 1 minute, respectively, before applying the conditioner. CHX, SNPs, TNPs, and ZNPs were applied for 1 minute after applying the conditioner in groups F, G, H, and I, respectively. The specimens were restored with a conventional GIC and underwent µSBS testing after 24 hours. The data were analyzed using the one-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s test (p=0.05). Results The applications of the nanoparticles (SNP, TNP, and ZNP) after the conditioner were associated with significantly greater µSBS values compared to that of the control group (p values < 0.05). Significantly higher µSBS values were observed when TNP or ZNP was applied after the conditioner compared to their applications before the conditioner (p values < 0.05). The highest µSBS values were observed when TNP was applied after the conditioner. Conclusion Dentin pretreatment with the nanoparticles after applying the conditioner enhanced the bond strength of the GIC to dentin compared with the control group. The best results were obtained for the TNPs applied after the conditioner.

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

“…Cell viability 81.3% (day 7), CS = 8.13 MPa (at MPC 2%), suppressed metabolic activity by 59.03% and lactic acid production of biofilms by 70.02%, reduced biofilm CFU by 2 logs, reduced protein adsorption by 76.87%. AgNP [ 50 ] Chitosan-mediated, hydrodynamic diameter 122 nm Ketac™ CEM, Easymix,3M (Type I) 10, 30, 50%NPs in GIC, evaluation of mechanical properties and color stability The addition of AgNPs (10%) induced significant increase in CS = 37 MPa (compared with control 27MPa); the addition of AgNPs also led to significant color change (ΔE = >3.3) and appearance of pores in the cement AgNP [ 51 ] Commercially available GC Fuji II GP ® (type II ii ) 5%NPs in GIC, evaluation of μSBS Addition of AgNPs increases the bond strength of the restoration: μSBS = 6.96 MPa, compared with control 3.77 MPa CuNP [ 48 ] Synthesized using ascorbic acid, 10.87 nm GC Fuji IX GP ® (type II ii ) 1, 2, 3, 4%NPs in GIC, evaluation of antimicrobial potential against Streptococcus mutans and Streptococcus sanguinis Addition of 2–4% CuNPs provided antimicrobial potential to the GIC: HDPFs viability = 68-72% (after 48 h), <10 CFU S. mutans (3 and 4%), <20 CFU S. sanguinis (4%) AgNP [ 52 ] Commercially available, 25 nm Harvard Ionoglas Cem ® (type I) 5%NPs in GIC, evaluation of physico-mechanical properties Addition of AgNPs significantly increased most of the physico-mechanical parameters: CS~150 MPa, DTS~11 MPa, FS = 29 MPa, H = 90.4 VHN; control CS = 117 MPa, DTS = 7.2 MPa, FS = 27.4 MPa, H = 56.6 VHN; AgNP [ 53 ] Commercially available GC Fuji II GP ® (type II ii ) …”

“…An increase in the compressive strength and flexural strength was observed for addition of NMs up to 5%. Best results (at 5%NP): CS = 15.51 MPa (control 7.63), FS = 26.39 MPa (control 16.11) TiO 2 [ 51 ] Commercially available GC Fuji II GP ® (type II ii ) 5% NM in GIC, evaluation of μSBS TiO 2 can be incorporated in GIC without compromising the bond strength: μSBS = 4.15 MPa, compared with control 3.77 MPa ZnO [ 51 ] Commercially available 5% NM in GIC, evaluation of μSBS Incorporation of ZnO affected the bond strength: μSBS = 2.93 MPa, compared with control 3.77 MPa TiO 2 [ 52 ] Commercially available, 21 nm Harvard Ionoglas Cem ® (type I) 5% NM in GIC, evaluation of physico-mechanical properties Addition of TiO 2 NMs significantly increased the physico-mechanical parameters: CS = 154.2 MPa, DTS = 13.2 MPa, FS ~28.5 MPa, H ~89 VHN; control CS = 117 MPa, DTS = 7.2 MPa, FS = 27.4 MPa, H = 56.6 VHN TiO 2 [ 53 ] Commercially available GC Fuji II GP ® (type II ii ) 0.1% NM, used as a pretreatment (after the conditioner), evaluation of μSBS Dentin pretreatment with the nanoparticles after applying the conditioner enhanced the bond strength: μSBS = 4.81 MPa, compared with control 2.17 MPa ZnO [ 53 ] Commercially available Dentin pretreatment with the nanoparticles after applying the conditioner enhanced the bond strength: μSBS = 4.07 MPa, compared with control 2.17 MPa TiO 2 [ 64 ] Nanotubes, chemically synthesized, particle size ...…”

Biological and Physicochemical Characterization of Self-Adhesive Protective Coating Dental Restorative Material after Incorporation of Antibacterial Nanoparticles

“…The addition of zinc oxide and titanium dioxide nanoparticles in dental restorative materials improves not only antibacterial qualities but also physical and mechanical properties such as microhardness, compressive strength, and flexural strength [ 19 , 31 ]. In the present study, zinc oxide and titanium dioxide nanoparticles were separately incorporated in different concentrations, whereby the hypothesis is accepted that antibacterial performance was improved after adding these nanoparticles.…”

Applications of Titanium Dioxide Nanostructure in Stomatology

“…The incorporation of TiO 2 -NPs into GIC increased the particle size distribution and occupied the blank area between GIC particles to inhibit the propagation of cracks, thus enhancing the strength of the material [112]. The mechanical properties [113] and antibacterial properties [114] of the material were upgraded without affecting the bonding with enamel and dentin [115,116].…”