EVALUATION OF COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH, FLUORIDE RELEASE, AND RECHARGE ABILITY BETWEEN GIOMER AND GLASS IONOMER RESTORATIVE MATERIALS
Main Article Content
Keywords
Compressive Strength, Fluoride Release, Recharge Ability.
Abstract
Over the past three decades, dentistry has made significant advances in restorative materials, aiming to achieve optimal durability, aesthetics, and fluoride-releasing properties to reduce caries risk. The purpose of the study is to compare the compressive strength, fluoride release, and recharge capacity of Giomer and traditional glass ionomer restorative materials.
Aim of the study: The aim of the study was to compare the compressive strength, fluoride release, and recharge capacity of Giomer and traditional glass ionomer restorative materials.
Methods: This in vitro experimental study at the Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University (BSMMU), in collaboration with the Analytical Research Division and the Pilot Plant & Process Development Centre, Bangladesh Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (BCSIR) Laboratories, Dhaka, Bangladesh (2007–2008), assessed fluoride release, recharge, and compressive strength of Composite, Compomer, Giomer, and Glass-Ionomer discs, with measurements via ion-selective electrode/ion chromatography and universal testing machine, analyzed using ANOVA and Bonferroni tests (p < 0.05).
Results: Giomer showed the highest compressive strength (271.36 MPa), followed by composite (238.60 MPa) and compomer (203.44 MPa) with no significant difference (p > 0.05). Fluoride release was highest in glass ionomer both before (Day 1: 8.54 ppm; Day 3: 1.99 ppm; Day 6: 1.04 ppm) and after recharge (Day 7: 1.37 ppm; Day 10: 0.95 ppm; Day 13: 0.90 ppm), while giomer showed the lowest values; all intergroup differences were significant (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Giomer showed the highest compressive strength, while glass ionomer exhibited superior fluoride release and recharge capacity.
References
2. Garcez RM, Buzalaf MA, Araújo PA. Fluoride release of six restorative materials in water and pH-cycling solutions. Journal of Applied Oral Science. 2007;15:406-11.
3. Nicholson JW. Fluoride-releasing dental restorative materials: An update. Balkan Journal of Dental Medicine. 2014;18(2):60-9.
4. Berg JH, Croll TP. Glass ionomer restorative cement systems: an update. Pediatric dentistry. 2015 Apr 15;37(2):116-24.
5. Mungara J, Philip J, Joseph E, Rajendran S, Elangovan A, Selvaraju G. Comparative evaluation of fluoride release and recharge of pre-reacted glass ionomer composite and nano-ionomeric glass ionomer with daily fluoride exposure: An: in vitro: study. Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry. 2013 Oct 1;31(4):234-9.
6. Hugar SM, Kohli D, Badakar CM, Vyavahare SS, Shah PP, Gokhale NS, Patel PM, Mundada MV. Comparative assessment of conventional composites and coloured compomers in permanent molars of children with mixed dentition: A pilot study. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR. 2017 Jun 1;11(6):ZC69.
7. Yilmaz Y, Keles S, Sezen O. Microtensile bond strength of polyacid-modified composite resin to irradiated primary molars. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2013 Apr 1;19(2):189-95.
8. Arora V, Bogra P. Giomer-a new hybrid aesthetic restorative material. Journal of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics. 2002 Oct 1;5(4):149-55.
9. Walia R, Jasuja P, Verma KG, Juneja S, Mathur A, Ahuja L. A comparative evaluation of microleakage and compressive strength of Ketac Molar, Giomer, Zirconomer, and Ceram-x: An: in vitro: study. Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry. 2016 Jul 1;34(3):280-4.
10. Yap AU, Wang X, Wu X, Chung SM. Comparative hardness and modulus of tooth-colored restoratives: a depth-sensing microindentation study. Biomaterials. 2004 May 1;25(11):2179-85.
11. Dhull KS, Nandlal B. Effect of low-concentration daily topical fluoride application on fluoride release of giomer and compomer: An: in vitro: study. Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry. 2011 Jan 1;29(1):39-45.
12. Donly KJ, Gomez C. restoration margins utilizing fluoride-releasing composite resin. Quintessence Int. 1994;25:355-8.
13. Zimmerman BF, Rawls HR, Querens AE. Prevention of in vitro secondary caries with an experimental fluoride-exchanging restorative resin. Journal of dental research. 1984 May;63(5):689-92.
14. Griffin E. Caries inhibition by fluoride-releasing liners. Am J Dent. 1992;5:293-5.
15. Tysowsky G, Jensen M, Sheth J. Anticariogenic potential of fluoride releasing dental restorative materials. Journal of Dental Research. 1988;67:145.
16. Jensen ME, Wefel JS, Hammesfahr PD. Fluoride-releasing liners: in vitro recurrent caries. General dentistry. 1991;39(1):12-7.
17. Dijken JW. A clinical evaluation of anterior conventional, microfiller and hybrid composite resin fillings. Acta Odontol Scand. 1985;44:357-67.
18. Mjor IA. Frequency of secondary caries at various anatomical locations. Operative Dentistry. 1985;10(3):88-92.
19. Forss H, Jokinen J, Spets-Happonen S, Seppä L, Luoma H. Fluoride and mutans streptococci in plaque grown on glass ionomer and composite. Caries research. 1991 Nov 18;25(6):454-8.
20. Ten Cate JM. Physicochemical aspects of fluoride-enamel interactions. Fluoride in dentistry. 1996:252-7.
21. Xu X, Burgess JO, Turpin-Mair JS. Fluoride release and recharge of fluoride releasing restorative materials. J Dent Res. 1999;78:159.
22. Vieira AR, De Souza IP, Modesto A. Fluoride uptake and release by composites and glass ionomers in a high caries challenge situation. American journal of dentistry. 1999 Feb 1;12(1):14-8.
23. Vijayan M, Rajendran R, Sreevatsan R. Comparative evaluation of microhardness between giomer, compomer, composite and resin-modified GIC. International Dental Journal of Students Research. 2018;6(3):61-5.
24. Mousavinasab SM, Meyers I. Fluoride release by glass ionomer cements, compomer and giomer. Dental research journal. 2009;6(2):75.
25. Itota T, Carrick TE, Yoshiyama M, McCabe JF. Fluoride release and recharge in giomer, compomer and resin composite. Dental Materials. 2004 Nov 1;20(9):789-95.
26. Bansal R, Bansal T. A Comparative Evaluation of the Amount of Fluoride Release and Re-Release after Recharging from Aesthetic Restorative Materials: An in vitro Study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015 Aug;9(8):ZC11-4.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Dr. Sheikh Muhammad Abdul Quader
Associate Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Update Dental College & Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Dr. Abdullah Al Mahmud
Assistant Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Sapporo Dental College & Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Mst. Laila Akter Banu
Assistant Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Dhaka Dental College & Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh