•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare high viscosity glass ionomer cement (HVGIC), giomer and microhybrid composite using the atomic force microscopy (AFM) and Vickers microhardness. Methods: Three different restorative materials Equia Forte (HVGIC), Beautifil II (giomer) and Solare X (microhybrid composite) were used in this study. A total of 30 samples were prepared, 10 of each of the restorative materials used in our study. Samples were prepared using standard cylindrical Teflon molds with a diameter of 8 mm and a height of 2 mm. The measurements of surface roughness and hardness were performed by using AFM and Vickers microhardness, respectively. The surface roughness was analyzed using the Kruskal Wallis test. One-way variance analysis (ANOVA) and LSD test was used for the surface hardness (α = 0.05). Results: There was no significant difference between the groups according to surface roughness values (p> 0.05). A statistically significant difference was found between all groups in terms of surface hardness. Conclusion: Reinforced glass ionomer cements had similar and surface properties than composite resin.

References

  1. Erdemir U, Yildiz E, Eren MM, Ozsoy A, Topcu FT. Effects of polishing systems on the surface roughness of tooth-colored materials. J Dent Sci. 2013;8(2):160-9.
  2. Hamouda IM. Effects of various beverages on hardness, roughness, and solubility of esthetic restorative materials. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2011;23(5):315-22.
  3. Kumari CM, Bhat KM, Bansal R. Evaluation of surface roughness of different restorative composites after polishing using atomic force microscopy. J Conserv Dent. 2016;19(1):56-62.
  4. Erdemir U, Yildiz E, Eren MM, Ozel S. Surface hardness evaluation of different composite resin materials: influence of sports and energy drinks immersion after a short-term period. J Appl Oral Sci. 2013;21:124-31.
  5. Yanıkoğlu ND, Sakarya RE. Test methods used in the evaluation of the structure features of the restorative materials: A literature review. J Mater Res Technol. 2020;9(5):9720-34.
  6. Najeeb S, Khurshid Z, Zafar MS, Khan AS, Zohaib S, Martí JMN, et al. Modifications in glass ionomer cements: nano-sized fillers and bioactive nanoceramics. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17(7):1134.
  7. Kielbassa AM, Oehme EP, Shakavets N, Wolgin M. In vitro wear of (resin-coated) high-viscosity glass ionomer cements and glass hybrid restorative systems. J Dent. 2021;105:103554.
  8. Colceriu Burtea L, Prejmerean C, Prodan D, Baldea I, Vlassa M, Filip M, et al. New pre-reacted glass containing dental composites (giomers) with improved fluoride release and biocompatibility. Mater. 2019;12(23):4021.
  9. Ikemura K, Tay FR, Endo T, Pashley DH. A review of chemical-approach and ultramorphological studies on the development of fluoride-releasing dental adhesives comprising new pre-reacted glass ionomer (PRG) fillers. Dent Mater J. 2008;27(3):315-39.
  10. Erdemir U, Yıldız E, Eren MM. Effects of sports drinks on color stability of nanofilled and microhybrid composites after long-term immersion. J Dent. 2012;40:e55-e63.
  11. Giacomelli L, Derchi G, Frustaci A, Bruno O, Covani U, Barone A, et al. Surface roughness of commercial composites after different polishing protocols: an analysis with atomic force microscopy. Open Dent J. 2010;4:191.
  12. Dutra D, Pereira G, Kantorski K, Valandro L, Zanatta F. Does finishing and polishing of restorative materials affect bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation? A systematic review. Oper Dent. 2018;43(1):E37-E52.
  13. Al-Angari SS, Hara AT, Chu T-M, Platt J, Eckert G, Cook NB. Physicomechanical properties of a zinc-reinforced glass ionomer restorative material. J Oral Sci. 2014;56(1):11-6.
  14. de Sousa Barbosa RP, Pereira-Cenci T, da Silva WM, Coelho-de-Souza FH, Demarco FF, Cenci MS. Effect of cariogenic biofilm challenge on the surface hardness of direct restorative materials in situ. J Dent. 2012;40(5):359-63.
  15. Yap AU, Yap SH, Teo CK, Ng JJ. Comparison of surface finish of new aesthetic restorative materials. Oper Dent. 2004;29(1):100-4.
  16. Bonifácio CC, Werner A, Kleverlaan CJ. Coating glass-ionomer cements with a nanofilled resin. Acta Odontol Scand. 2012;70(6):471-7.
  17. Kielbassa AM, Glockner G, Wolgin M, Glockner K. Systematic review on highly viscous glass-ionomer cement/resin coating restorations (Part II): Do they merge Minamata Convention and minimum intervention dentistry? Quintessence Int. 2017;48(1):9-18.
  18. Perez CdR, Hirata Jr R, Silva A, Sampaio E, Miranda M. Effect of a glaze/composite sealant on the 3-D surface roughness of esthetic restorative materials. Oper Dent. 2009;34(6):674-80.
  19. Yarimizu H, Sakuma T, Akahane S, Hirota K, editors. Wear properties of experimental MFR composite (NGD220) for posterior restoration. J Dent Res 2002, 81: 174.
  20. Valinoti AC, Neves BG, Silva EMd, Maia LC. Surface degradation of composite resins by acidic medicines and pH-cycling. J Appl Oral Sci. 2008;16(4):257-65.
  21. Kielbassa AM, Glockner G, Wolgin M, Glockner K. Systematic review on highly viscous glass-ionomer cement/resin coating restorations (Part I): Do they merge Minamata Convention and minimum intervention dentistry? Quintessence Int. 2016;47(10):813-23.
  22. Moshaverinia M, Navas A, Jahedmanesh N, Shah KC, Moshaverinia A, Ansari S. Comparative evaluation of the physical properties of a reinforced glass ionomer dental restorative material. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;122(2):154-9.
  23. Vijaya n M, R ajend ra n R , Sreevatsa n R. Comparative evaluation of microhardness between giomer, compomer, composite and resin-modified GIC. Int Dent J Student Res. 2020;6(3):61-5.
  24. Kooi T, Tan Q, Yap A, Guo W, Tay K, Soh M. Effects of food-simulating liquids on surface properties of giomer restoratives. Oper Dent. 2012;37(6):665-71.
  25. Blackham JT, Vandewalle KS, Lien W. Properties of hybrid resin composite systems containing prepolymerized filler particles. Oper Dent. 2009;34(6):697-702.
  26. Sever EK, Simenc N, Rakic M, Skenderovic H, Sever I, Tarle Z. Effects of bleaching agent on physical and aesthetic properties of restorative materials. Dent Mater J. 2016;35(5):788-95.
  27. Faraji F, Heshmat H, Banava S. Effect of protective coating on microhardness of a new glass ionomer cement: Nanofilled coating versus unfilled resin. J Conserv Dent. 2017;20(4):260-3.
  28. Bagheri R, Taha N, Azar M, Burrow M. Effect of G-Coat Plus on the mechanical properties of glass-ionomer cements. Aust Dent J. 2013;58(4):448-53.
  29. Ghazal M, Kern M. The influence of antagonistic surface roughness on the wear of human enamel and nanofilled composite resin artificial teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;101(5):342-9.
  30. Wongkhantee S, Patanapiradej V, Maneenut C, Tantbirojn D. Effect of acidic food and drinks on surface hardness of enamel, dentine, and tooth-coloured filling materials. J Dent. 2006;34(3):214- 20.
  31. Cuy JL, Mann AB, Livi KJ, Teaford MF, Weihs TP. Nanoindentation mapping of the mechanical properties of human molar tooth enamel. Arch Oral Biol. 2002;47(4):281-91.
  32. Yazkan B, Ermis RB. Effect of resin infiltration and microabrasion on the microhardness, surface roughness and morphology of incipient carious lesions. Acta Odontol Scand. 2018;76(7):473-81.
  33. Erdur EA, Akın M, Cime L, İleri Z. Evaluation of enamel surface roughness after various finishing techniques for debonding of orthodontic brackets. Turk J Orthod. 2016;29(1):1-5.
  34. Abdelmegid F. Effect of deproteinization before and after acid etching on the surface roughness of immature permanent enamel. Niger J Clin Pract. 2018;21(5):591-6.
  35. Abreu LG, Paiva SM, Pretti H, Lages EMB, Júnior JBN, Ferreira RAN. Comparative study of the effect of acid etching on enamel surface roughness between pumiced and non-pumiced teeth. J Int Oral Health. 2015;7(9):1-6.

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.