Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri

karakaş, seda nur

doi:10.17567/ataunidfd.895057

Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri

Seda Nur KARAKAŞ (Çukurova Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Restoratif Diş Tedavisi Anabilim Dalı, Adana, Türkiye)

Current research in dental sciences (Online)

18 3

Yıl: 2022 Cilt: 32 Sayı: 4 Sayfa Aralığı: 297 - 304 Metin Dili: Türkçe DOI: 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057 İndeks Tarihi: 02-11-2022

Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri

Öz:

Restoratif materyallerin kimyasal, fiziksel ve mekanik özellikleri yapılan restorasyonun uzun ömürlü olabilmesi ve hasta memnuniyeti için büyük önem taşımaktadır. Günümüzde daimi resto- ratif materyaller olarak amalgam, kompozit rezin ve cam iyonomer simanlar rutin klinik uygulama- larda kullanılmaktadır. Cam iyonomer simanlar 1972’de piyasa çıkarıldıkları tarihten itibaren farklı klinik uygulamalar için kullanılmıştır. Cam iyonomer simanların diş dokularına kimyasal olarak bağlanabilmesi, flor salınımı, antikaryojenik ve remineralizasyon potansiyellerinin olması gibi bir- çok avantajları bulunmaktadır. Ancak aşınmaya dirençlerinin ve mekanik özelliklerinin zayıf olması ve sertleşme aşamasında neme hassasiyetlerinin yüksek olması gibi olumsuzluklar daimi dişlerde kullanımını sınırlamaktadır. Son zamanlarda sahip olduğu olumlu özellikler nedeniyle daimi res- toratif materyal olarak kullanmak için birçok araştırma ve geliştirme çalışması başlamıştır. Cam iyonomer simanların olumsuz özelliklerini giderebilmek amacıyla, içeriklerinde, toz oranlarında ve sertleşme reaksiyonlarında bir çok değişiklik yapılmıştır. Böylece zayıf fiziksel ve mekanik özel- likleri güçlendirilerek daimi restoratif materyal olarak kullanılmaktadır. Bu derlemede restoratif materyal olarak kullanımı artmakta olan cam iyonomer simanların içeriği ve güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer simanlardaki son gelişmeler incelenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelime:

Reinforced glass ionomer cement types

Öz:

The chemical, physical, and mechanical properties of the restorative materials have great impor- tance for the longevity of the restoration and patient satisfaction. At the present time, amal- gam, composite resin, and glass ionomer cements are used in common clinical applications as permanent restorative materials. Glass ionomer cements have been used for different clinical applications since their introduction in the market in 1972. Glass ionomer cements have many advantages such as chemically bonding to tooth tissues, fluoride release, anti-caryogenic and remineralization potentials. However, its low abrasion resistance and mechanical properties and its high sensitivity to moisture during the setting phase limit its use in permanent teeth. Recently, many research and development studies have started to be used as permanent restor- ative material due to its positive properties. In order to eliminate the negative properties of glass ionomer cements, many changes have been made in their contents, powder ratios and harden- ing reactions. Thus, its weak physical and mechanical properties are strengthened and used as a permanent restorative material. In this review, the content and recent developments of glass ionomer cements which are increasingly used as restorative materials are examined.

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Derleme Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Croll TP, Nicholson JW. Glass ionomer cements in pediatric dentistry: Review of the literature. Pediatr Dent. 2002;24(5):423-429.
2. Mickenautsch S, Mount G, Yengopal V. Therapeutic effect of glass ionomers: An overview of evidence. Aust Dent J. 2011;56(1):10-5. [CrossRef]
3. Wilson AD, Kent BE, Clinton D, Miller RP. The formation and micro- structure of dental silicate cements. J Mater Sci. 1972;7(2):220-238. [CrossRef]
4. Bowen RL, Marjenhoff WA. Dental composites/glass ionomers: The materials. Adv Dent Res. 1992;6(1):44-49. [CrossRef]
5. Sakaguchi R, Powers J. Restorative Materials–Ceramics. Craig’s Restorative Dental Materials. 13th ed Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier; 2012:25.
6. ADA Council on Scientific Affairs. Direct and indirect restorative materials. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003;134(4):463-472. [CrossRef]
7. Murdoch-Kinch CA, McLean ME. Minimally invasive dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003;134(1):87-95. [CrossRef]
8. Peters MC, McLean ME. Minimally invasive operative care: II. Con- temporary techniques and materials: An overview. J Adhes Dent. 2001;3(1):17-31.
9. Najeeb S, Khurshid Z, Zafar MS, et al. Modifications in glass ionomer cements: Nano-sized fillers and bioactive nanoceramics. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17(7):1134-1148. [CrossRef]
10. Lohbauer U. Dental glass ionomer cements as permanent filling materials?–Properties, limitations and future trends. Materials. 2009;3(1):76-96. [CrossRef]
11. Sakaguchi R, Powers J. Restorative materials-composites and poly- mers. Craig’s Restor Dent Mater. 2012:13.
12. Baig MS, Fleming GJ. Conventional glass-ionomer materials: A review of the developments in glass powder, polyacid liquid and the strategies of reinforcement. J Dent. 2015;43(8):897-912. [CrossRef]
13. Davidson CL. Advances in glass-ionomer cements. J Appl Oral Sci. 2006;14(suppl):3-9. [CrossRef]
14. Fareed MA, Stamboulis A. Nanoclay addition to a conventional glass ionomer cements: Influence on physical properties. Eur J Dent. 2014;8(4):456-463. [CrossRef]
15. Fejerskov O, Kidd E. Dental Caries: The Disease and Its Clinical Man- agement. 2nd ed. Oxford, Blackwell Munksgaard; 2008:385-426.
16. Wiegand A, Buchalla W, Attin T. Review on fluoride-releasing restora- tive materials—fluoride release and uptake characteristics, antibac- terial activity and influence on caries formation. Dent Mater. 2007;23(3):343-362. [CrossRef]
17. Burke FM, Ray NJ, McConnell RJ. Fluoride containing restorative materials. Int Dent J. 2006;56(1):33-43. [CrossRef]
18. Hattab FN, Amin WM. Fluoride release from glass ionomer restora- tive materials and the effects of surface coating. Biomaterials. 2001;22(12):1449-1458. [CrossRef]
19. Kleverlaan CJ, van Duinen RN, Feilzer AJ. Mechanical properties of glass ionomer cements affected by curing methods. Dent Mater. 2004;20(1):45-50. [CrossRef]
20. Ngo HC, Mount G, Mc Intyre J, Tuisuva J, Von Doussa RJ. Chemical exchange between glass-ionomer restorations and residual carious dentineinpermanentmolars:aninvivostudy.JDent.2006;34(8):608- 613. [CrossRef]
21. Van Meerbeek B, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P. Glass-ionomer adhesion: The mechanisms at the interface. J Dent. 2006;34(8):615-617. [CrossRef]
22. Sidhu SK. Glass ionomer cement restorative materials: A sticky sub- ject? Aust Dent J. 2011;56(suppl 1):23-30. [CrossRef]
23. Diamanti I, Koletsi-Kounari H, Mamai-Homata E, Vougiouklakis G. In vitro evaluation of fluoride and calcium sodium phosphosilicate toothpastes, on root dentine caries lesions. J Dent. 2011;39(9):619- 628. [CrossRef]
24. Berg JH, Croll TP. Glass ionomer restorative cement systems: An update. Pediatr Dent. 2015;37(2):116-124.
25. Köroğlu A, Ekren DO, Kurtoğlu C. Geleneksel ve adeziv dental siman- lar hakkında bir derleme çalışması. Curr Res Dent Sci. 2012:205-216.
26. 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. 2016:204-207.
27. Caughman WF, Caughman GB, Dominy WT, Schuster GS. Glass iono- mer and composite resin cements: effects on oral cells. J Prosthet Dent. 1990;63(5):513-521. [CrossRef]
28. Khoroushi M, Keshani F. A review of glass-ionomers: From conven- tional glass-ionomer to bioactive glass-ionomer. Dent Res J (Isfa- han). 2013;10(4):411-420.
29. Burke BF, Fleming G, Owen F, Watson D. Materials for restoration of primary teeth: 2. Glass ionomer derivatives and compomers. Dent Update. 2002;29:10-7.
30. Nicholson JW, Czarnecka B. The biocompatibility of resin-modified glass-ionomer cements for dentistry. Dent Mater. 2008;24(12):1702- 1708. [CrossRef]
31. Uysal T, Yagci A, Uysal B, Akdogan G. Are nano-composites and nano- ionomers suitable for orthodontic bracket bonding? Eur J Orthod. 2010;32(1):78-82. [CrossRef]
32. Chen MH. Update on dental nanocomposites. J Dent Res. 2010;89(6):549-560. [CrossRef]
33. Oxman JD, Craig BD, Kalgutkar RS, Peuker M, Bissinger P. Processes for forming dental materials and device. Google Patents. 2006.
34. Xu X, Burgess JO, strength C. Compressive strength, fluoride release and recharge of fluoride-releasing materials. Biomaterials. 2003;24(14):2451-2461. [CrossRef]
35. Nicholson JW. Polyacid-modified composite resins (“compomers”) and their use in clinical dentistry. Dent Mater. 2007;23(5):615-622. [CrossRef]
36. Çapan BŞ, Akyüz S. Çocuk diş hekimliğinde fluorid salınımı yapan güncel restoratif materyaller. Clin Exp Health Sci. 2016;6:129-134.
37. Dionysopoulos P, Kotsanos N, Pataridou A. Fluoride release and uptake by four new fluoride releasing restorative materials. J Oral Rehabil. 2003;30(9):866-872. [CrossRef]
38. Attar N, Turgut MD. Fluoride release and uptake capacities of fluoride- releasing restorative materials. Oper Dent. 2003;28(4):395-402.
39. Mutluay MS. Süt dişlerinde restoratif materyal seçimi ve etkileyen faktörler. Selcuk Dent. 2016;3(3):151-158. [CrossRef]
40. Guggenberger R, May R, Stefan KP. New trends in glass-ionomer chemistry. Biomaterials. 1998;19(6):479-483. [CrossRef]
41. van Duinen RN, Kleverlaan CJ, de Gee AJ, Werner A, Feilzer AJ. Early and long-term wear of ‘fast-set’ conventional glass–ionomer cements. Dent Mater. 2005;21(8):716-720. [CrossRef]
42. Basting RT, Serra MC, Rodrigues AL. In situ microhardness evaluation of glass–ionomer/composite resin hybrid materials at different post irradiation times. J Oral Rehabil. 2002;29(12):1187-1195. [CrossRef]
43. Crowley CM, Doyle J, Towler MR, Hill RG, Hampshire S. The influence of capsule geometry and cement formulation on the apparent vis- cosity of dental cements. J Dent. 2006;34(8):566-573. [CrossRef]
44. Dowling AH, Fleming GJ. Are encapsulated anterior glass-ionomer restoratives better than their hand-mixed equivalents? J Dent. 2009;37(2):133-140. [CrossRef]
45. Celik EU, Ermis B. Koruyucu rezin uygulamasinin yüksek viskoziteli geleneksel cam i̇yonomer simanin mikrosertliği üzerine etkisinin in vitro olarak değerlendirilmesi. Cumhuriyet Üni Diş Hek Fak Derg;11:91-95.
46. Wang XY, Yap AUJ, Ngo HC. Effect of early water exposure on the strength of glass ionomer restoratives. Oper Dent. 2006;31(5):584- 589. [CrossRef]
47. Şener Y, Koyutürk A. Üç farklı cam iyonomer simanın yüzey sertlikle- ri-nin karşılaştırılması. Cumhuriyet Univ Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2006;9:91-94.
48. Gurgan S, Kutuk ZB, Ergin E, Oztas SS, Cakir FY. Clinical performance of a glass ionomer restorative system: A 6-year evaluation. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(7):2335-2343. [CrossRef]
49. Türkün LS, Kanik Ö. A prospective six-year clinical study evaluating reinforced glass ionomer cements with resin coating on posterior teeth: Quo vadis? Oper Dent. 2016;41(6):587-598. [CrossRef]
50. Friedl K, Hiller KA, Friedl KH. Clinical performance of a new glass ionomer based restoration system: A retrospective cohort study. Dent Mater. 2011;27(10):1031-1037. [CrossRef]
51. Kavrık F, Savaş S, Küçükyilmaz E, Uzer Çelik EU. Yüksek çürük riskli adölesanlarda farklı tedavi yaklaşımları. Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci Cases. 2016;2(1):35-43. [CrossRef]
52. Ikemura K, Tay FR, Endo T, Pashley DH. A review of chemical- approach and ultramorphological studies on the development of fluoride-releasing dental adhesives comprising new pre-reacted glass ionomer (PRG) fillers. Dent Mater J. 2008;27(3):315-339. [CrossRef]
53. Gordan VV, Mondragon E, Watson RE, Garvan C, Mjör IA. A clinical evaluation of a self-etching primer and a giomer restorative material: Results at eight years. J Am Dent Assoc. 2007;138(5):621-627. [CrossRef]
54. Deliperi S, Bardwell DN, Wegley C, Congiu MD. In vitro evaluation of giomers microleakage after exposure to 33% hydrogen peroxide: Self-etch vs total-etch adhesives. Oper Dent. 2006;31(2):227-232. [CrossRef]
55. Kimyai S, Savadi-Oskoee S, Ajami AA, Sadr A, Asdagh S. Effect of three prophylaxis methods on surface roughness of giomer. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2011;16(1):e110-e114. [CrossRef]
56. Sengul F, Gurbuz T. Clinical evaluation of restorative materials in pri- mary teeth class II lesions. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2015;39(4):315-321. [CrossRef]
57. 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;25(4):551-556. [CrossRef]
58. Zainuddin N, Karpukhina N, Law RV, Hill RG. Characterisation of a remineralising Glass Carbomer® ionomer cement by MAS-NMR spectroscopy. Dent Mater. 2012;28(10):1051-1058. [CrossRef]
59. Rao A, Rao A, Sudha P. Fluoride rechargability of a non-resin auto- cured glass ionomer cement from a fluoridated dentifrice: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2011;29(3):202-204. [CrossRef]
60. Algera TJ, Kleverlaan CJ, Prahl-Andersen B, Feilzer AJ. The influence of environmental conditions on the material properties of setting glass-ionomer cements. Dent Mater. 2006;22(9):852-856. [CrossRef]
61. Cehreli SB, Tirali RE, Yalcinkaya Z, Cehreli ZC. Microleakage of newly developed glass carbomer cement in primary teeth. Eur J Dent. 2013;7(1):15-21.
62. Menne-Happ U, Ilie N. Effect of gloss and heat on the mechanical behaviour of a glass carbomer cement. J Dent. 2013;41(3):223-230. [CrossRef]
63. Nicholson JW. Fluoride-releasing dental restorative materials: An update. Balk J Dent Med. 2014;18(3):60-69. [CrossRef]
64. Walia R, Jasuja P, Verma KG, Juneja S, Mathur A, Ahuja L. A compara- tive evaluation of microleakage and compressive strength of ketac molar, giomer, zirconomer, and ceram-x: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2016;34(3):280-284. [CrossRef]
65. Patel MU, Punia SK, Bhat S, et al. An in vitro evaluation of microleakage of posterior teeth restored with amalgam, composite and zircono- mer–A stereomicroscopic study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015;9:65-62.
66. Tiwari S, Kenchappa M, Bhayya D, et al. Antibacterial activity and fluoride release of glass-ionomer cement, compomer and zirconia reinforced glass-ionomer cement. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(4):ZC90- ZC93. [CrossRef]
67. Abdulsamee N, Elkhadem AH. Zirconomer and zirconomer improved (white amalgams): Restorative materials for the future [review]. EC Dent Sci. 2017;15:134-150.
68. Khoroushi M, Mousavinasab SM, Keshani F, Hashemi S. Effect of resin-modified glass ionomer containing bioactive glass on the flex- ural strength and morphology of demineralized dentin. Oper Dent. 2013;38(2):E1-10. [CrossRef]
69. Bhattacharya A, Vaidya S, Tomer AK, Raina A. GIC at It’s best–A review on ceramic reinforced GIC. Int J Appl Dent Sci. 2017;3:405-408.
70. Bariker RH, Mandroli PS. An in-vitro evaluation of antibacterial effect of amalgomer CR and Fuji VII against bacteria causing severe early childhood caries. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2016;34(1):23-29. [CrossRef]
71. Ayad NM, Elnogoly SA, Badie OM. An in-vitro study of the physico- mechanical properties of a new esthetic restorative versus dental amalgam. Rev Clín Pesq Odontol. 2008;4:137-144.
72. G Nigam AG, Jaiswal J, Murthy R, Pandey R. Estimation of fluoride release from various dental materials in different media—an in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2009;2(1):1-8. [CrossRef]
73. Choudhary K, Nandlal B. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of nano-hydroxyapatite incorporated glass ionomer cement and conventional glass ionomer cement on dense synthetic hydroxyapatite disk: An in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res. 2015;26(2):170-175. [CrossRef]
74. Barandehfard F, Kianpour Rad MK, Hosseinnia A, et al. The addition of synthesized hydroxyapatite and fluorapatite nanoparticles to a glass- ionomer cement for dental restoration and its effects on mechanical properties. Ceram Int. 2016;42(15):17866-17875. [CrossRef]
75. Hench LL. The story of Bioglass®. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2006;17(11):967-978. [CrossRef]
76. Kadiyala SV, Raj JD. Recent advances and modifications of dental restorative materials. A review IJAMR. 2016;3:1609-1616.
77. Jyothi K, Annapurna S, Kumar AS, Venugopal P, Jayashankara C. Clini- cal evaluation of giomer-and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in class V noncarious cervical lesions: An in vivo study. J Conserv Dent. 2011;14(4):409-413. [CrossRef]
78. Ebaya MM, Ali AI, Mahmoud SH. Evaluation of marginal adaptation and microleakage of three glass ionomer-based Class V restorations: In vitro study. Eur J Dent. 2019;13(4):599-606. [CrossRef]
79. Sharma A, Singh M, Pandey V. Glass ionomer cement-a phoenix and its new flight. Int J Res Health Allied Sci. 2015;1:9-12.
80. Piekarz C, Ranjitkar S, Hunt D, McIntyre J. An in vitro assessment of the role of Tooth Mousse in preventing wine erosion. Aust Dent J. 2008;53(1):22-25. [CrossRef]
81. Reynolds EC. Anticariogenic complexes of amorphous calcium phos- phate stabilized by casein phosphopeptides: A review. Spec Care Dentist. 1998;18(1):8-16. [CrossRef]
82. Mazzaoui SA, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ, Dashper SG, Eakins D, Reyn- olds EC. Incorporation of casein phosp hopeptide-amorphous cal- cium phosphate into a glass-ionomer cement. J Dent Res. 2003;82(11):914-918. [CrossRef]
83. Botelho MG. Inhibitory effects on selected oral bacteria of antibacte- rial agents incorporated in a glass ionomer cement. Caries Res. 2003;37(2):108-114. [CrossRef]
84. Gpv S, Elsa N, Agrawal A. Newer advances in glass ionomer cement: A review. Ann Essences Dent. 2016;8:19-23.
85. Gu YW, Yap AUJ, Cheang P, Khor KA. Effects of incorporation of HA/ ZrO2 into glass ionomer cement (GIC). Biomaterials. 2005;26(7):713- 720. [CrossRef]
86. Elsaka SE, Hamouda IM, Swain MV. Titanium dioxide nanoparticles addition to a conventional glass-ionomer restorative: Influence on physical and antibacterial properties. J Dent. 2011;39(9):589-598. [CrossRef]
87. AlOtaibi G. Recent advancements in glass ionomer materials with introduction of nanotechnology: A review. Int J Oral Care Res. 2019;7(1):21-23. [CrossRef]

APA	karakaş s (2022). Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri. , 297 - 304. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
Chicago	karakaş seda nur Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri. (2022): 297 - 304. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
MLA	karakaş seda nur Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri. , 2022, ss.297 - 304. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
AMA	karakaş s Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri. . 2022; 297 - 304. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
Vancouver	karakaş s Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri. . 2022; 297 - 304. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
IEEE	karakaş s "Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri." , ss.297 - 304, 2022. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
ISNAD	karakaş, seda nur. "Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri". (2022), 297-304. https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.895057

APA	karakaş s (2022). Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri. Current research in dental sciences (Online), 32(4), 297 - 304. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
Chicago	karakaş seda nur Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri. Current research in dental sciences (Online) 32, no.4 (2022): 297 - 304. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
MLA	karakaş seda nur Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri. Current research in dental sciences (Online), vol.32, no.4, 2022, ss.297 - 304. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
AMA	karakaş s Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri. Current research in dental sciences (Online). 2022; 32(4): 297 - 304. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
Vancouver	karakaş s Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri. Current research in dental sciences (Online). 2022; 32(4): 297 - 304. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
IEEE	karakaş s "Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri." Current research in dental sciences (Online), 32, ss.297 - 304, 2022. 10.17567/ataunidfd.895057
ISNAD	karakaş, seda nur. "Güçlendirilmiş cam iyonomer siman çeşitleri". Current research in dental sciences (Online) 32/4 (2022), 297-304. https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.895057