Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2011 Oct;56(10):1014-9.
doi: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2011.03.005. Epub 2011 Apr 13.

Mineral loss on adjacent enamel glass ionomer cements restorations after cariogenic and erosive challenges

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Mineral loss on adjacent enamel glass ionomer cements restorations after cariogenic and erosive challenges

C F C Salas et al. Arch Oral Biol. 2011 Oct.

Abstract

Objectives: the purpose of this study was to determine the mineral loss on surrounding enamel restored with glass ionomer cements (GIC) after erosive and cariogenic challenges.

Methods: Bovine enamel specimens were randomly assigned into six groups according to the restorative material: G1 - composite resin; G2 - high viscous GIC; G3 - resin-modified glass ionomer with nanoparticles; G4 - encapsulated resin-modified GIC; G5 - encapsulated high viscous GIC; G6 - resin-modified GIC. After restorative procedures, half of specimens in each group were submitted to caries challenge using a pH cycling model for 5 days, and the other half were submitted to erosive challenge in citric acid for 10 min. Before and after the challenges, surface Knoop microhardness assessments were performed and mineral changes were calculated for adjacent enamel at different distances from restorative margin.

Results: Data were compared for significant differences using two-way ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls tests (p<0.05). Erosive challenge significantly reduced enamel surface hardness, but no significant difference was observed irrespectively restorative materials (p>0.05). The cariogenic challenge promoted a higher surface hardness loss for the resin-modified GIC (G4) and only for the High viscous GIC (G2) an increase in surface hardness was observed. For enamel analyses, significant differences were observed with respect to the different materials (p<0.001) and distances (p=0.023). Specimens restored with the composite resin presented higher mineral loss and specimens restored with the conventional high viscous GIC and the encapsulated resin-modified GIC presented the lowest values for mineral loss.

Conclusion: The GICs exerts protective effect only for cariogenic challenge.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources