47
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Modifications in Glass Ionomer Cements: Nano-Sized Fillers and Bioactive Nanoceramics

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Glass ionomer cements (GICs) are being used for a wide range of applications in dentistry. In order to overcome the poor mechanical properties of glass ionomers, several modifications have been introduced to the conventional GICs. Nanotechnology involves the use of systems, modifications or materials the size of which is in the range of 1–100 nm. Nano-modification of conventional GICs and resin modified GICs (RMGICs) can be achieved by incorporation of nano-sized fillers to RMGICs, reducing the size of the glass particles, and introducing nano-sized bioceramics to the glass powder. Studies suggest that the commercially available nano-filled RMGIC does not hold any significant advantage over conventional RMGICs as far as the mechanical and bonding properties are concerned. Conversely, incorporation of nano-sized apatite crystals not only increases the mechanical properties of conventional GICs, but also can enhance fluoride release and bioactivity. By increasing the crystallinity of the set matrix, apatites can make the set cement chemically more stable, insoluble, and improve the bond strength with tooth structure. Increased fluoride release can also reduce and arrest secondary caries. However, due to a lack of long-term clinical studies, the use of nano-modified glass ionomers is still limited in daily clinical dentistry. In addition to the in vitro and in vivo studies, more randomized clinical trials are required to justify the use of these promising materials. The aim of this paper is to review the modification performed in GIC-based materials to improve their physicochemical properties.

          Related collections

          Most cited references116

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration.

          The osseointegration rate of titanium dental implants is related to their composition and surface roughness. Rough-surfaced implants favor both bone anchoring and biomechanical stability. Osteoconductive calcium phosphate coatings promote bone healing and apposition, leading to the rapid biological fixation of implants. The different methods used for increasing surface roughness or applying osteoconductive coatings to titanium dental implants are reviewed. Surface treatments, such as titanium plasma-spraying, grit-blasting, acid-etching, anodization or calcium phosphate coatings, and their corresponding surface morphologies and properties are described. Most of these surfaces are commercially available and have proven clinical efficacy (>95% over 5 years). The precise role of surface chemistry and topography on the early events in dental implant osseointegration remain poorly understood. In addition, comparative clinical studies with different implant surfaces are rarely performed. The future of dental implantology should aim to develop surfaces with controlled and standardized topography or chemistry. This approach will be the only way to understand the interactions between proteins, cells and tissues, and implant surfaces. The local release of bone stimulating or resorptive drugs in the peri-implant region may also respond to difficult clinical situations with poor bone quality and quantity. These therapeutic strategies should ultimately enhance the osseointegration process of dental implants for their immediate loading and long-term success.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results.

            The immediate bonding effectiveness of contemporary adhesives is quite favorable, regardless of the approach used. In the long term, the bonding effectiveness of some adhesives drops dramatically, whereas the bond strengths of other adhesives are more stable. This review examines the fundamental processes that cause the adhesion of biomaterials to enamel and dentin to degrade with time. Non-carious class V clinical trials remain the ultimate test method for the assessment of bonding effectiveness, but in addition to being high-cost, they are time- and labor-consuming, and they provide little information on the true cause of clinical failure. Therefore, several laboratory protocols were developed to predict bond durability. This paper critically appraises methodologies that focus on chemical degradation patterns of hydrolysis and elution of interface components, as well as mechanically oriented test set-ups, such as fatigue and fracture toughness measurements. A correlation of in vitro and in vivo data revealed that, currently, the most validated method to assess adhesion durability involves aging of micro-specimens of biomaterials bonded to either enamel or dentin. After about 3 months, all classes of adhesives exhibited mechanical and morphological evidence of degradation that resembles in vivo aging effects. A comparison of contemporary adhesives revealed that the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesives remain the 'gold standard' in terms of durability. Any kind of simplification in the clinical application procedure results in loss of bonding effectiveness. Only the two-step self-etch adhesives approach the gold standard and do have some additional clinical benefits.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Review on fluoride-releasing restorative materials--fluoride release and uptake characteristics, antibacterial activity and influence on caries formation.

              The purpose of this article was to review the fluoride release and recharge capabilities, and antibacterial properties, of fluoride-releasing dental restoratives, and discuss the current status concerning the prevention or inhibition of caries development and progression. Information from original scientific full papers or reviews listed in PubMed (search term: fluoride release AND (restorative OR glass-ionomer OR compomer OR polyacid-modified composite resin OR composite OR amalgam)), published from 1980 to 2004, was included in the review. Papers dealing with endodontic or orthodontic topics were not taken into consideration. Clinical studies concerning secondary caries development were only included when performed in split-mouth design with an observation period of at least three years. Fluoride-containing dental materials show clear differences in the fluoride release and uptake characteristics. Short- and long-term fluoride releases from restoratives are related to their matrices, setting mechanisms and fluoride content and depend on several environmental conditions. Fluoride-releasing materials may act as a fluoride reservoir and may increase the fluoride level in saliva, plaque and dental hard tissues. However, clinical studies exhibited conflicting data as to whether or not these materials significantly prevent or inhibit secondary caries and affect the growth of caries-associated bacteria compared to non-fluoridated restoratives. Fluoride release and uptake characteristics depend on the matrices, fillers and fluoride content as well as on the setting mechanisms and environmental conditions of the restoratives. Fluoride-releasing materials, predominantly glass-ionomers and compomers, did show cariostatic properties and may affect bacterial metabolism under simulated cariogenic conditions in vitro. However, it is not proven by prospective clinical studies whether the incidence of secondary caries can be significantly reduced by the fluoride release of restorative materials.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Int J Mol Sci
                Int J Mol Sci
                ijms
                International Journal of Molecular Sciences
                MDPI
                1422-0067
                14 July 2016
                July 2016
                : 17
                : 7
                : 1134
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, Al-Farabi Colleges, P.O Box 361724, Riyadh 11313, Saudi Arabia; shariqnajeeb@ 123456gmail.com
                [2 ]Department of Dental Biomaterials, College of Dentistry, King Faisal University, P.O. Box 400, Al-Hofuf 31982, Saudi Arabia; drzohaibkhurshid@ 123456gmail.com
                [3 ]Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Taibah University, Madina Munawwarrah 41311, Saudi Arabia; mzafar@ 123456taibahu.edu.sa
                [4 ]Interdisciplinary Research Centre in Biomedical Materials, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Defence Road, off Raiwind Road, Lahore 54000, Pakistan; draskhan@ 123456ciitlahore.edu.pk
                [5 ]Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering, King Faisal University, Al-Hofuf 31982, Saudia Arabia; szohaib@ 123456kfu.edu.sa
                [6 ]Preventive and Minimally Invasive Dentistry (Spanish Course), Departamento de Odontología, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad CEU-Cardenal Herrera, Valencia 46115, Spain; juan.nunez@ 123456uch.ceu.es
                [7 ]Dental Biomaterials, Preventive and Minimally Invasive Dentistry (Bilingual course), Departamento de Odontología, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad CEU-Cardenal Herrera, Valencia 46115, Spain; salvatore.sauro@ 123456uch.ceu.es
                [8 ]The University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Dentistry, Dental Materials Science, Hong Kong, China; jpmat@ 123456hku.hk
                [9 ]Department of Materials Science and Engineering, The Kroto Research Institute, The University of Sheffield, North Campus, Broad Lane, Sheffield S3 7HQ, UK
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: i.u.rehman@ 123456sheffield.ac.uk ; Tel.: +44-(0)-114-222-5946; Fax: +44-(0)-114-222-5945
                Article
                ijms-17-01134
                10.3390/ijms17071134
                4964507
                27428956
                651392e9-e070-4628-bd0c-efd478cda1fd
                © 2016 by the authors.

                Submitted for possible open access publication under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 28 April 2016
                : 09 July 2016
                Categories
                Review

                Molecular biology
                glass ionomer cement,restorative dentistry,nanotechnology,adhesive dentistry
                Molecular biology
                glass ionomer cement, restorative dentistry, nanotechnology, adhesive dentistry

                Comments

                Comment on this article