Evaluation of Flexural Strength and Microhardness of Different Type Glass Ionomer Cements

Year 2024, Volume: 51 Issue: 1, 10 - 14, 30.04.2024

Kübra Bilge , Enes Mustafa Aşar , İrem İpek

https://doi.org/10.52037/eads.2024.0002

Abstract

Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare flexural strength and microhardness of different types of glass ionomer cements (Fuji IX GP® Fast, Riva LC HV, EQUIA Forte Fil).
Materials and Methods: A total of 30 samples (n = 10) were prepared for microhardness test, and an additional total of 30 samples (n = 10) were prepared for the flexural strength test. Customized stainless steel molds (25×2×2 mm³) were produced for the flexural strength test, and 10 mm and 2 mm plexiglass molds were produced for the microhardness test. The prepared samples were stored in distilled water in a dark bottle at 37 °C (±1 °C) for 24 hours. A three-point bending test was performed using a universal testing device, and the maximum force values required to fracture the samples were determined in Newton by the device after the fracture. For the Vickers microhardness test measurements were made from different areas of the upper surfaces of each sample and the average of five measurements was calculated in MPa.
Results: When comparing the flexural strength values, EQUIA Forte Fil group observed the highest flexural strength value, while Riva LC HV group had lowest flexural strength value. When comparing the microhardness values, EQUIA Forte Fil group showed the highest microhardness value, whereas Riva LC HV group observed the lowest microhardness value.
Conclusion: The use of EQUIA Forte Fil, which has the highest microhardness and flexural strength values, and similarly strengthened glass ionomer cements may enhance clinical success.

Key Words: glass ionomer cements; microhardness; flexural strength

Keywords

glass ionomer cements, microhardness, flexural strength

References

• 1. de Lima Navarro MF, Pascotto RC, Borges AFS, Soares CJ, Raggio DP, Rios D, et al. Consensus on glass-ionomer cement thresholds for restorative indications. J Dent. 2021;107:103609. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103609.
• 2. Ausiello P, Ciaramella S, Martorelli M, Lanzotti A, Gloria A, Watts DC. CAD-FE modeling and analysis of class II restorations incorporating resin-composite, glass ionomer and glass ceramic materials. Dent Mater. 2017;33(12):1456–1465. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2017.10.010.
• 3. Patil K, Patel A, Kunte S, Shah P, Kaur B, Paranna S. Comparative evaluation of the mechanical properties of zinc-reinforced glass ionomer cement and glass ionomer type IX cement: an in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2020;13(4):381. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1798.
• 4. Mitra S. Adhesion to dentin and physical properties of a lightcured glass-ionomer liner/base. J Dent Res. 1991;70(1):72–74. doi:10.1177/00220345910700011201.
• 5. Bakhadher W. Modification of glass ionomer restorative material: A review of literature. EC Dent Sci. 2019;18:1001–6.
• 6. Pameijer CH. Crown retention with three resin-modified glass ionomer luting agents. J am Dent Assoc. 2012;143(11):12181222. doi:10.14219/jada.archive.2012.0067.
• 7. Pereira LCG, Nunes MCP, Dibb RGP, Powers JM, Roulet JF, de Lima Navarro MF. Mechanical properties and bond strength of glass-ionomer cements. J Adhes Dent. 2002;4(1).
• 8. Fleming GJ, Farooq AA, Barralet JE. Influence of powder/liquid mixing ratio on the performance of a restorative glass-ionomer dental cement. Biomater. 2003;24(23):4173–4179. doi:10.1016/s0142-9612(03)003016.
• 9. Sulaiman T, Abdulmajeed A, Altitinchi A, Ahmed S, Donovan T. Effect of resin-modified glass ionomer cement dispensing/mixing methods on mechanical properties. Oper Dent. 2018;43(4):E158–E165. doi:10.2341/17-166-L.
• 10. EQUIA Forte [web site];. Available from: https://www.gc.dental/america/products/operatory/ glass-hybrid-restoratives/equia-forte.
• 11. Aakriti RJ, Bhushan J, Bhagat P. To evaluate and compare microleakage in teeth restored with conventional glass ionomer cement and two newer restorative materials EQUIA Forte and Cention N using stereomicroscope. J Adv Med Dent Scie Res. 2020;8(8):163–167. doi:10.21276/jamdsr.
• 12. Korkut E, Gezgin O, Tulumbacı F, Özer H, Şener Y. Biyoaktif Rezin Modifiye Cam İyonomer Simanın Mekanik Özelliklerinin Karşılaştırmalı Değerlendirilmesi. EÜ Dişhek Fak Derg. 2017.
• 13. de Mendonça BC, Soto-Montero JR, de Castro EF, Pecorari VGA, Rueggeberg FA, Giannini M. Flexural strength and microhardness of bulk-fill restorative materials. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021;33(4):628–635. doi:10.1111/jerd.12727.
• 14. Ellakuria J, Triana R, Mınguez N, Soler I, Ibaseta G, Maza J, et al. Effect of one-year water storage on the surface microhardness of resin-modified versus conventional glass-ionomer cements. Dent Mater. 2003;19(4):286–290. doi:10.1016/s01095641(02)00042-8.
• 15. Dowling AH, Fleming GJ, McGinley EL, Addison O. Improving the standard of the standard for glass ionomers: an alternative to the compressive fracture strength test for consideration? J Dent. 2012;40(3):189–201. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2011.12.002.
• 16. Kunte S, Shah SB, Patil S, Shah P, Patel A, Chaudhary S. Comparative evaluation of compressive strength and diametral tensile strength of conventional glass ionomer cement and a glass hybrid glass ionomer cement. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2022;15(4):398. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2407.
• 17. Malhotra S, Bhullar KK, Kaur S, Malhotra M, Kaur R, Handa A. Comparative evaluation of compressive strength and flexural strength of gc gold hybrid, gic conventional and resin-modified glass-ionomer cement. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2022;14(Suppl1):S214–S216. doi:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs13422.
• 18. Soygun K, Soygun A, Dogan MC. The effects of chitosan addition to glass ionomer cement on microhardness and surface roughness. J Appl Biomater Func. 2021;19:2280800021989706. doi:10.1177/2280800021989706.
• 19. Sideridou ID, Karabela MM, Micheliou CN, Karagiannidis PG, Logothetidis S. Physical properties of a hybrid and a nanohybrid dental light-cured resin composite. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed. 2009;20(13):1831–1844. doi:10.1163/156856208X386435.
• 20. Moshaverinia M, Navas A, Jahedmanesh N, Shah KC, Moshaverinia A, Ansari S. Comparative evaluation of the physical properties of a reinforced glass ionomer dental restorative material. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;122(2):154–159. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.03.012.
• 21. Bonifácio CC, Werner A, Kleverlaan CJ. Coating glass ionomer cements with a nanofilled resin. Acta Odontol Scand.2012;70(6):471–477. doi:10.3109/00016357.2011.639307.
• 22. VG S. To evaluate the effect of surface coating on three different types glass ionomer restorations. Biomed Pharmacol J. 2015;8(October Spl Edition):445–449. doi:10.13005/bpj/720.
• 23. Chen L, Shen H, Suh BI. Antibacterial dental restorative materials: a state-of-the-art review. Am J Dent. 2012;25(6):337–346.
• 24. Kurata S, Hamada N, Kanazawa A, Endo T. Study on antibacterial dental resin using tri-n-butyl (4-vinylbenzyl) phosphonium chloride. Dent Mater J. 2011;30(6):960–966. doi:10.4012/dmj.2011-157.
• 25. Kim KH, Ong JL, Okuno O. The effect of filler loading and morphology on the mechanical properties of contemporary composites. J Prosthet Dent. 2002;87(6):642–649. doi:10.1067/mpr.2002.125179.
• 26. Kanchanavasita W, Anstice H, Pearson G. Long-term surface micro-hardness of resin-modified glass ionomers. J Dent. 1998;26(8):707–712. doi:10.1016/s0300-5712(98)00011-6.
• 27. Prabhakar A, Basappa N. Comparative evaluation of the remineralizing effects and surface micro hardness of glass ionomer cements containing bioactive glass (S53P4): an in vitro study. 14 | Bilge et al. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2010;3(2):69. doi:10.5005/jp-journals10005-1057.
• 28. Moberg M, Brewster J, Nicholson J, Roberts H. Physical property investigation of contemporary glass ionomer and resin modified glass ionomer restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig. 2019;23:1295–1308. doi:10.1007/s00784-018-2554-3.
• 29. Bonifácio C, Kleverlaan C, Raggio DP, Werner A, De Carvalho R, Van Amerongen W. Physical-mechanical properties of glass ionomer cements indicated for atraumatic restorative treatment. Aust Dent J. 2009;54(3):233–237. doi:10.1111/j.18347819.2009.01125.x.