Journal of Operative Dentistry & Endodontics

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  7 (2022)
Volume  6 (2021)
Volume  5 (2020)
Volume  4 (2019)
Volume  3 (2018)
Volume  2 (2017)
Volume  1 (2016)
Related articles

VOLUME 3 , ISSUE 2 ( December, 2018 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength and Flexural Strength of New Zirconia Reinforced Glass Ionomer Cement with Commonly used Glass Ionomer Cements Used in Atraumatic Restorative Treatment: An In Vitro Study

Jaya Naidu, Pavan B Tambakad

Keywords : Atraumatic restorative treatment, Flexural strength, Glass ionomer cements, Shear bond strength, Stereomicroscope

Citation Information : Naidu J, Tambakad PB. Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength and Flexural Strength of New Zirconia Reinforced Glass Ionomer Cement with Commonly used Glass Ionomer Cements Used in Atraumatic Restorative Treatment: An In Vitro Study. J Oper Dent Endod 2018; 3 (2):83-91.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10047-0062

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-09-2018

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2018; The Author(s).


Abstract

Objective: The objectives of the present study were to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS), and the flexural strength (FS) of zirconia reinforced glass ionomer (Zirconomer) and two conventional glass ionomer cements commonly used in atraumatic restorative treatment (ART). Materials and methods: The bond sites for SBS testing were prepared on enamel (n = 45) and dentine (n = 45) on caries free, extracted human permanent molars. The specimens were randomly divided into six groups (n = 15) for each restorative material and site (dentine or enamel) tested. They were loaded in an Instron Universal Testing Machine (UTM) at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min for SBS and 1.0 mm/min for the three-point FS test until failure occurred. Mode of failure was assessed using stereomicroscope (10×). Results: Ketac™ Molar (KM) demonstrated the highest mean SBS to enamel and significantly higher mean SBS to dentin in comparison with the other groups. Zirconomer and Fuji IX GP Extra (FJ) showed comparable SBS to enamel and dentin. KM also demonstrated significantly higher FS in comparison to the other groups. Significance: Within the limitations of the present study, Zirconia reinforced glass ionomer cement (GIC) can be an alternative to conventional GICs for application in ART. However, further studies are required to prove its clinical performance in the clinical scenario.

PDF Share
  1. Berg JH. Glass Ionomer cements. Pediatr Dent. 2002;24(5):430- 438.
  2. Topbasi B, Öveçoglu ML, Turkmen C. Flexural strength and fracture surface characterization of glass-ionomer cements stored in water. OHDMBSC 2003;2(4):18-25.
  3. Bonifacio CC, Kleverlaan CJ, Raggio DP, Werner A, Carvalho RC, van Amerongen WE. Physical-mechanical properties of glass ionomer cements indicated for atraumatic restorative treatment. Aust Dent J 2009;54(3):233-237.
  4. Peez R, Frank S. The physical-mechanical performance of the new Ketac Molar Easymix compared to commercially available glass ionomer restoratives. J Dent 2006;34(8):582-587.
  5. Somani R, Jaidka S, Singh DJ, Sibal GK. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of various glass ionomer cements to dentin of primary teeth: An in vitro Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9(3):192-196.
  6. Chalissery VP, Marwah N, Almuhaiza M, Al Zailai AM, Chalisserry EP, Bhandi SH, et al. Study of the mechanical properties of the novel zirconia-reinforced glass ionomer cement. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(5):394-398.
  7. Patil KM, Hambire UV. Comparative Evaluation of Compressive, Flexural Strength and Micro Hardness of Different Dental Materials. IJSRD 2016;4(4):444-448.
  8. International Standard Organisation. ISO/TS11405:2015. Dentistry-Testing of adhesion to tooth structure. Geneva. ISO/TS:2015. Available from: http://www.iso.org/iso/ prods-services/ISOstore/store.html
  9. Carvalho TS, van Amerongen WE, de Gee A, Bönecker M, Sampaio FC. Shear bond strengths of three glass ionomer cements to enamel and dentine. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2011 May 1;16(3):e406-410.
  10. Chander K. Effects of aging on dentin bonding and mechanical properties of restorative glass ionomer cements. 2011. Available from: https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ ubctheses/24/items/1.0308659
  11. Shebl EA., Etman WM., Genaid ThM, Shalaby ME. Durability of bond strength of glass ionomers to enamel. Tanta Dent J 2015;12:16-27.
  12. Raju VG, Venumbaka NR, Mungara J, Vijayakumar P, Rajendran S, Elangovan A. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength and microleakage of tricalcium silicate-based restorative material and radioopaque posterior glass ionomer restorative cement in primary and permanent teeth: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2014;32:304-310.
  13. Gordan VV, Boyer D, Soderholm KJ. Enamel and dentine shear bond strength of two resin modified glass ionomers and two resin based adhesives. J Dent 1998;26:497-503.
  14. Poggio C, Beltrami R, Scribante A, Colombo M, Lombardini M. Effects of dentin surface treatments on shear bond strength of glass-ionomer cements. Ann Stomatol(Roma). 2014 Mar 31;5(1):15-22.
  15. Nagwa Mohamed AlyKhattab and Ola Moustafa Omar Papain–Based Gel for Chemo-Mechanical Caries Removal: Influence on Microleakage and Microshear Bond Strength of Esthetic Restorative Materials. Journal of American Science 2012;8(3): 391-399.
  16. ISO/Final Draft International Standard 4049:2000(E): Dentistry—Polymer-based filling, restorative and luting materials. Geneva, Switzerland, ISO Copyright Office, 2000. Available from: https://www.iso.org/standard/23041.html
  17. Piwowarczyk A, Ottl P, Lauer HW, Buchler A. Laboratory Strength of Glass Ionomer Cement, Compomers, and Resin Composites. J Prosthodont 2002;11:86-91.
  18. Raggio DP, Hesse D, Lenzi TL, Guglielmi CA, Braga MM. Is Atraumatic restorative treatment an option for restoring occlusoproximal caries lesions in primary teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2013 Nov;23(6):435-443.
  19. Hilgert LA, de Amorim R, Leal SC, Mulder J, Creugers NH, Frencken JE. Is high-viscosity glass-ionomer-cement a successor to amalgam for treating primary molars? Dental Materials 2014;30(10):1172-1178.
  20. Nagaraja Upadhya P, Kishore G. Glass Ionomer Cement – The Different Generations. 2005 Jan;18(2);158-165. Available from: http://medind.nic.in/taa/t05/i2/taat05i2p158.pdf
  21. Yap AU, Pek YS, Cheang P. Physico-mechanical properties of a fast-set highly viscous GIC restorative. J Oral Rehabil. 2003 Jan;30(1):1-8.
  22. Yesilyurt C, Bulucu B, Sezen 0, Bulut G, Celik D. Bond strengths of two conventional glass-ionomer cements to irradiated and non-irradiated dentin. Dent Mater J 2008; 27(5):695-701.
  23. Omrani LR, Sabouri P, Abbasi A, Ahmadi E, Ghavam M. Shear bond strength of two types of glass ionomer to bleached dentin: effect of delayed bonding and antioxidant agent. TODENTTJ 2016;10:720-727.
  24. Nujella BP, Choudary MT, Reddy SP, Kumar MK, Gopal T. Comparison of shear bond strength of aesthetic restorative materials. Contemp Clin Dent. 2012 Jan;3(1):22-26.
  25. Khattab NM, Omar OM. Papain–Based Gel for Chemo- Mechanical Caries Removal: Influence on Microleakage and Microshear Bond Strength of Esthetic Restorative Materials. Journal of American Science 2012;8(3):391-399.
  26. E. Lucas M, Arita K, Nishino M. Toughness, bonding and fluoride-release properties of Hydroxyapatite-added glass ionomer cement. Biomaterials 2003;24:3787-3794.
  27. Yap AU, Pek YS, Kumar RA, Cheang P, Khor KA. Experimental studies on a new bioactive material: HAIonomer cements. Biomaterials. 2002 Feb;23(3):955-962.
  28. Bonifácio, CC. The ART of GIC proximal restorations in primary teeth. 2012. Available from: https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/1871468/146155_thesis.pdf
  29. Garcia Pereira LC, Pessutti Nunes MC, Palma Dibb RC, M. Powers J, François Roulet J, de Lima Navarro MF. Mechanical Properties and Bond Strength of Glass-ionomer Cements. J Adhes Dent 2002;4:73-80.
  30. Holmgren CJ, Roux D, Doméjean S. Minimal intervention dentistry: part 5. Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) – a minimum intervention and minimally invasive approach for the management of dental caries. BDJ 2013;214:11-18.
  31. Koenraads H, Van der Kroon G, Frencken JE. Compressive strength of two newly developed glass-ionomer materials for use with the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) approach in class II cavities. Dent Mater. 2009 Apr;25(4):551-556.
  32. Beher M, Rosentritt M, Loher H, Handel G. Effect of variation from recommended powder/liquid ratio on some properties of resin-modified cements. Acta Odontol Scand. 2006;64:214-220.
  33. Yap AUJ, Mudambi S, Chew CL, Neo JCL. Mechanical properties of improved visible light-cured resin-modified glass ionomer cement. Oper Dent. 2001;26:295-301.
  34. Torabzadeh H, Ghasemi A, Shakeri S, Baghban AA, Razmavar S. Effect of powder/liquid ratio of glass ionomer cements on flexural and shear bond strengths to dentin. Braz J Oral Sci. 2011 Jul-Sep;10(3):204-207.
  35. El Wakeel AM, Elkassas DW, Yousry MM. Bonding of contemporary glass ionomer cements to different tooth substrates; microshear bond strength and scanning electron microscope study. Eur J Dent 2015;9:176-182.
  36. Prosser HJ, Powis DR, Wilson AD. Glass-ionomer cements of improved flexural strength. J Dent Res 1986;65:146-148.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.