» Articles » PMID: 29998443

Physical Property Investigation of Contemporary Glass Ionomer and Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Restorative Materials

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2018 Jul 13
PMID 29998443
Citations 24
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: The objective of this study was to investigate selected physical properties of nine contemporary and recently marketed glass ionomer cement (GIC) and four resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGI) dental restorative materials.

Materials And Methods: Specimens (n = 12) were fabricated for fracture toughness and flexure strength using standardized, stainless steel molds. Testing was completed on a universal testing machine until failure. Knoop hardness was obtained using failed fracture toughness specimens on a microhardness tester, while both flexural modulus and flexural toughness was obtained by analysis of the flexure strength results data. Testing was completed at 1 h, 24 h, 1 week, and then at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Mean data was analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney (p = 0.05).

Results: Physical properties results were material dependent. Physical properties of the GIC and RMGI products were inferior at 1 h compared to that at 24 h. Some improvement in selected physical properties were noted over time, but development processes were basically concluded by 24 h. A few materials demonstrated improved physical properties over the course of the evaluation.

Conclusions: Under the conditions of this study: 1. GIC and RMGI physical property performance over time was material dependent; 2. Polyalkenoate maturation processes are essentially complete by 24 h; 3. Although differences in GIC physical properties were noted, the small magnitude of the divergences may render such to be unlikely of clinical significance; 4. Modest increases in some GIC physical properties were noted especially flexural modulus and hardness, which lends support to reports of a maturing hydrogel matrix; 5. Overall, GIC product physical properties were more stable than RMGI; 6. A similar modulus reduction at 6 months for both RMGI and GIC produced may suggest a polyalkenoate matrix change; and 7. Globally, RMGI products demonstrated higher values of flexure strength, flexural toughness, and fracture toughness than GIC materials.

Clinical Relevance: As compared to RMGI materials, conventional glass ionomer restorative materials demonstrate more stability in physical properties.

Citing Articles

Fluoride-Induced Microhardness Changes in Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cements: A Comparative Study.

Rufasto-Goche K, Cerro-Olivares E, San Martin-Hilario N, Santander-Rengifo F, Murillo-Carrasco A, Lizarbe-Castro M J Clin Exp Dent. 2025; 17(1):e50-e57.

PMID: 39958247 PMC: 11829721. DOI: 10.4317/jced.62349.


An Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of a New Dual-cure, Universal, Bioactive Luting Cement.

Shams S, Nekkanti S, Shetty S Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2024; 17(8):887-891.

PMID: 39372341 PMC: 11451871. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2914.


Effect of Graphene Oxide Nanoparticles Incorporation on the Mechanical Properties of a Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement.

Moreira E Moraes R, Abreu M, Frazao M, Campos Ferreira P, Bauer J, Carvalho C Polymers (Basel). 2024; 16(17).

PMID: 39274034 PMC: 11396858. DOI: 10.3390/polym16172401.


Effect of Incorporating Date Seeds Microparticles on Compressive Strength and Microhardness of Conventional Glass Ionomer (an Study).

Abdulkhaliq A, Najim B J Clin Exp Dent. 2024; 16(7):e826-e835.

PMID: 39219827 PMC: 11360457. DOI: 10.4317/jced.61603.


The role of protective liners and glass ionomer in managing pulp temperature during light curing.

Munhoz V, Rocha M, Correr A, Sinhoreti M, Geraldeli S, Oliveira D J Clin Exp Dent. 2024; 16(6):e749-e754.

PMID: 39130362 PMC: 11310984. DOI: 10.4317/jced.61703.


References
1.
GRIFFIN S, Hill R . Influence of glass composition on the properties of glass polyalkenoate cements. Part I: influence of aluminium to silicon ratio. Biomaterials. 1999; 20(17):1579-86. DOI: 10.1016/s0142-9612(99)00058-7. View

2.
Wan A, Yap A, Hastings G . Acid-base complex reactions in resin-modified and conventional glass ionomer cements. J Biomed Mater Res. 1999; 48(5):700-4. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-4636(1999)48:5<700::aid-jbm15>3.0.co;2-1. View

3.
Ferracane J, Condon J . In vitro evaluation of the marginal degradation of dental composites under simulated occlusal loading. Dent Mater. 1999; 15(4):262-7. DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(99)00045-7. View

4.
Crisp S, Lewis B, Wilson A . Characterization of glass-ionomer cements. 1. Long term hardness and compressive strength. J Dent. 1976; 4(4):162-6. DOI: 10.1016/0300-5712(76)90025-7. View

5.
Young A, Sherpa A, Pearson G, Schottlander B, Waters D . Use of Raman spectroscopy in the characterisation of the acid-base reaction in glass-ionomer cements. Biomaterials. 2000; 21(19):1971-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0142-9612(00)00081-8. View