Medical and Dental Consultantsí Association of Nigeria
Home - About us - Editorial board - Search - Ahead of print - Current issue - Archives - Submit article - Instructions - Subscribe - Advertise - Contacts - Login 
  Users Online: 643   Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 22  |  Issue : 7  |  Page : 961-970

The evaluation of microleakage and fluoride release of different types of glass ionomer cements

1 Department of Restorative Dentistry, Dicle University, Faculty of Dentistry, Diyarbakir, Turkey
2 Department of Restorative Dentistry, Inonu University, Faculty of Dentistry, Malatya, Turkey
3 Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Adiyaman University, Adiyaman, Turkey
4 Department of Biostatistics, Dicle University, Faculty of Medicine, Diyarbakir, Turkey

Correspondence Address:
Dr. E Bahsi
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Dicle University, Faculty of Dentistry, Diyarbakir - 21280
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_644_18

Rights and Permissions

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate six different glass ionomer cement (GIC)-based restorative materials through comparisons of microleakage and fluoride release. Materials and Methods: For microleakage, 30 teeth were randomly separated into 6 groups of 5: Group 1 (Dyract: compomer), Group 2 (Freedom: compomer), Group 3 (Equia: high-viscosity glass ionomer cements), Group 4 (Fuji IX: resin-modified glass ionomer cement), Group 5 (Ketac Molar: traditional glass ionomer cement [TGIC]) and Group 6 (Voco: TGIC). For fluoride release of six different GIC-based restorative materials, standard samples were prepared of 4 mm thickness and 7 mm diameter. A total of 60 samples were obtained as 10 samples from each group. The analyses were made using a Thermo Orion 720 A+ ionometer with the Orion fluoride electrode. At the end of 24 h, 72 h, 7 days, 14 days, and 30 days, the electrode was placed into the dish containing the sample, distilled water, and TISAB II; a reading was taken; and the value shown on the screen was recorded. Results: For microleakage, a statistically significant difference was determined between the groups in respect of the occlusal variable (P < 0.05), no statistically significant gingival variable (P > 0.05). About fluoride release: According to the repeated measures variance analysis results, the difference between the groups, and between the time-group interaction and according to time, was found to be statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusions: In terms of microleakage, it was concluded that all materials could be used in clinical applications. The Equia high-viscosity glass ionomer cements (HVGIC) was determined to be the material with the highest fluoride release value.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded310    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal