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
. 2024 Jun 26:2024:5597367.
doi: 10.1155/2024/5597367. eCollection 2024.

Assessing the Impact of Nano-Graphene Oxide Addition on Surface Microhardness and Roughness of Glass Ionomer Cements: A Laboratory Study

Farahnaz Sharafeddin  1 , Mohammad Mahdi Shirani  2 , Zahra Jowkar  3
Affiliations

Assessing the Impact of Nano-Graphene Oxide Addition on Surface Microhardness and Roughness of Glass Ionomer Cements: A Laboratory Study

Farahnaz Sharafeddin et al. Int J Dent. .

Abstract

Background: Nanomaterials, including nano-graphene oxide (nGO), have emerged as promising modifiers for dental materials. Therefore, this study investigated the effect of incorporating nGO into conventional glass ionomer cement (CGIC) and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) on surface roughness and hardness.

Methods: Sixty disk-shaped specimens (2 × 6 mm) were divided into six groups: CGIC, RMGIC, CGIC with 1 wt.% nGO, CGIC with 2 wt.% nGO, RMGIC with 1 wt.% nGO, and RMGIC with 2 wt.% nGO. Surface roughness (Ra) and Vickers microhardness (VHN) were measured using a surface profilometer and Vickers microhardness tester, respectively. Statistical analysis employed the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests (p <0.05).

Results: The microhardness of RMGICs significantly increased with 1% and 2% nGO (p=0.017, P=0.001, respectively), while CGICs showed a significant decrease in VHN with nGO incorporation (p=0.001). VHN values of all CGIC groups were significantly higher than those of all RMGIC groups (p=0.001). Mean surface roughness values for all CGICs were significantly higher than those of RMGIC groups (p=0.001). Within the RMGIC groups, mean Ra values of RMGIC + 1 wt.% nGO and RMGIC + 2 wt.% nGO groups decreased significantly compared to the RMGIC control group (p=0.001, p=0.001, respectively). Among CGIC groups, mean Ra values of 1 wt.% and 2 wt.% nGO/CGIC groups were significantly higher than the CGIC control group (p=0.016, p=0.001).

Conclusion: Incorporating nGO into RMGICs increased surface microhardness while reducing surface roughness, offering potential advantages for clinical applications. Conversely, adding nGO to CGICs increased surface roughness and decreased surface hardness. These findings emphasize the potential benefits of utilizing nGO in RMGICs and their implications in clinical practice.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Mold used in the study for specimen preparation.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Specimens prepared for the study in different groups.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Indentation surface microhardness in all study groups. Panels (a–f) represent the following groups: (a) conventional glass ionomer cement (CGIC), (b) CGIC + 1 wt.% nano-graphene oxide (nGO), (c) CGIC + 2 wt.% nGO, (d) RMGIC, (e) RMGIC + 1 wt.% nGO, and (f) RMGIC + 2 wt.% nGO.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Sidhu S. K., Nicholson J. W. A review of glass-ionomer cements for clinical dentistry. Journal of Functional Biomaterials . 2016;7(3) doi: 10.3390/jfb7030016.16 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kumar R. Senthil, Ravikumar N., Kavitha S., et al. Nanochitosan modified glass ionomer cement with enhanced mechanical properties and fluoride release. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules . 2017;104:1860–1865. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.05.120. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sharafeddin F., Jowkar Z., Bahrani S. Comparison between the effect of adding microhydroxyapatite and chitosan on surface roughness and microhardness of resin modified and conventional glass ionomer cements. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry . 2021;13(8):e737–e744. doi: 10.4317/jced.55996. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hill E. E., Lott J. A clinically focused discussion of luting materials. Australian Dental Journal . 2011;56(s1):67–76. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01297.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Khoroushi M., Keshani F. A review of glass-ionomers: from conventional glass-ionomer to bioactive glass-ionomer. Dental Research Journal . 2013;10(4):411–20. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources