Restor Dent Endod.  2018 Aug;43(3):e32. 10.5395/rde.2018.43.e32.

Effects of a bleaching agent on properties of commercial glass-ionomer cements

• de Camargo FLL
• Lancellotti AC
• de Lima AF
• Geraldo Martins VR
• Gonçalves LdS

• KMID: 2418465
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2018.43.e32

Abstract

OBJECTIVES
This study evaluated the effects of a bleaching agent on the composition, mechanical properties, and surface topography of 6 conventional glass-ionomer cements (GICs) and one resin-modified GIC.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
For 3 days, the specimens were subjected to three 20-minute applications of a 37% H2O2-based bleaching agent and evaluated for water uptake (WTK), weight loss (WL), compressive strength (CS), and Knoop hardness number (KHN). Changes in surface topography and chemical element distribution were also analyzed by energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy. For statistical evaluation, the Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon paired tests (a = 0.05) were used to evaluate WTK and WL. CS specimens were subjected to 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey post hoc test (α = 0.05), and KH was evaluated by one-way ANOVA, the Holm-Sidak post hoc test (a = 0.05), and the t-test for independent samples (a = 0.05).
RESULTS
The bleaching agent increased the WTK of Maxxion R, but did not affect the WL of any GICs. It had various effects on the CS, KHN, surface topography, and the chemical element distribution of the GICs.
CONCLUSIONS
The bleaching agent with 37% H2O2 affected the mechanical and surface properties of GICs. The extent of the changes seemed to be dependent on exposure time and cement composition.

Keyword

Dental materials; Glass-ionomer cement; Tooth whitening agents

MeSH Terms

Compressive Strength
Dental Materials
Glass Ionomer Cements
Hardness
Microscopy, Electron, Scanning
Spectrum Analysis
Surface Properties
Tooth Bleaching Agents
Water
Weight Loss
Dental Materials
Glass Ionomer Cements
Tooth Bleaching Agents
Water

Figure

• 

  Figure 1. Scanning electron microscopic images of glass-ionomer cements (×2,000): (A) Ketac Cem, (B) Ketac Molar, (C) Maxxion R, (D) Vitremer, (E) Vitro Fil, (F) Vitro Molar, and (G) Vidrion R. In the first column are shown the untreated specimens, followed by the treated groups, including the first (′), second (′′), and third (′′′) sessions, after 24, 48, and 72 hours, respectively.

Reference

References

1. Wilson AD, Kent BE. The glassionomer cement, a new translucent dental filling material. J Chem Technol Biotechnol. 1971; 21:313.

2. Baroudi K, Mahmoud RS, Tarakji B. Fluoride release of glass ionomer restorations after bleaching with two different bleaching materials. Eur J Dent. 2013; 7:196–200.

3. Markovic DL, Petrovic BB, Peric TO. Fluoride content and recharge ability of five glassionomer dental materials. BMC Oral Health. 2008; 8:21.

4. Wiegand A, Buchalla W, Attin T. Review on fluoride-releasing restorative materials–fluoride release and uptake characteristics, antibacterial activity and influence on caries formation. Dent Mater. 2007; 23:343–362.

5. Arita K, Yamamoto A, Shinonaga Y, Harada K, Abe Y, Nakagawa K, Sugiyama S. Hydroxyapatite particle characteristics influence the enhancement of the mechanical and chemical properties of conventional restorative glass ionomer cement. Dent Mater J. 2011; 30:672–683.

6. Benetti AR, Jacobsen J, Lehnhoff B, Momsen NC, Okhrimenko DV, Telling MT, Kardjilov N, Strobl M, Seydel T, Manke I, Bordallo HN. How mobile are protons in the structure of dental glass ionomer cements? Sci Rep. 2015; 5:8972.

7. Bresciani E, Barata TJ, Fagundes TC, Adachi A, Terrin MM, Navarro MF. Compressive and diametral tensile strength of glass ionomer cements. J Appl Oral Sci. 2004; 12:344–348.

8. Carvalho FG, Sampaio CS, Fucio SB, Carlo HL, Correr-Sobrinho L, Puppin-Rontani RM. Effect of chemical and mechanical degradation on surface roughness of three glass ionomers and a nanofilled resin composite. Oper Dent. 2012; 37:509–517.

9. Khoroushi M, Keshani F. A review of glassionomers: From conventional glassionomer to bioactive glassionomer. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2013; 10:411–420.

10. Baroudi K, Mahmoud RS, Tarakji B, Altamimi MA. Effect of vital bleaching on disintegration tendency of glass ionomer restorations. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014; 8:214–217.

11. de Paula AB, de Fúcio SB, Alonso RC, Ambrosano GM, Puppin-Rontani RM. Influence of chemical degradation on the surface properties of nano restorative materials. Oper Dent. 2014; 39:E109–E117.

12. El-Murr J, Ruel D, St-Georges AJ. Effects of external bleaching on restorative materials: a review. J Can Dent Assoc. 2011; 77:b59.

13. Markovic L, Jordan RA, Glasser MC, Arnold WH, Nebel J, Tillmann W, Ostermann T, Zimmer S. Effects of bleaching agents on surface roughness of filling materials. Dent Mater J. 2014; 33:59–63.

14. Turker SB, Biskin T. Effect of three bleaching agents on the surface properties of three different esthetic restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 89:466–473.

15. Samiei M, Janani M, Vahdati A, Alemzadeh Y, Bahari M. Scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray microanalysis of set CEM cement after application of different bleaching agents. Iran Endod J. 2017; 12:191–195.

16. Yu H, Li Q, Lin Y, Buchalla W, Wang Y. Influence of carbamide peroxide on the flexural strength of tooth-colored restorative materials: an in vitro study at different environmental temperatures. Oper Dent. 2010; 35:300–307.

17. Yu H, Li Q, Wang YN, Cheng H. Effects of temperature and in-office bleaching agents on surface and subsurface properties of aesthetic restorative materials. J Dent. 2013; 41:1290–1296.

18. Zavanelli AC, Mazaro VQ, Silva CR, Zavanelli RA, Mancuso DN. Surface roughness analysis of four restorative materials exposed to 10% and 15% carbamide peroxide. Int J Prosthodont. 2011; 24:155–157.

19. Crim GA. Prerestorative bleaching: effect on microleakage of Class V cavities. Quintessence Int. 1992; 23:823–825.

20. Mair L, Joiner A. The measurement of degradation and wear of three glass ionomers following peroxide bleaching. J Dent. 2004; 32(Supplementary 1):41–45.

21. Briso AL, Lima AP, Gonçalves RS, Gallinari MO, dos Santos PH. Transenamel and transdentinal penetration of hydrogen peroxide applied to cracked or microabrasioned enamel. Oper Dent. 2014; 39:166–173.

22. Gonçalves LS, Moraes RR, Ogliari FA, Boaro L, Braga RR, Consani S. Improved polymerization efficiency of methacrylate-based cements containing an iodonium salt. Dent Mater. 2013; 29:1251–1255.

23. Fonseca RB, Branco CA, Quagliatto PS, Gonçalves LS, Soares CJ, Carlo HL, Correr-Sobrinho L. Influence of powder/liquid ratio on the radiodensity and diametral tensile strength of glass ionomer cements. J Appl Oral Sci. 2010; 18:577–584.

24. Lim HN, Kim SH, Yu B, Lee YK. Influence of HEMA content on the mechanical and bonding properties of experimental HEMA-added glass ionomer cements. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009; 17:340–349.

25. Topaloglu-Ak A, Cogulu D, Ersin NK, Sen BH. Microhardness and surface roughness of glass ionomer cements after APF and TiF4 applications. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2012; 37:45–51.

26. Sidhu SK, Nicholson JW. A review of glassionomer cements for clinical dentistry. J Funct Biomater. 2016; 7:16.

27. Della Bona A, Rosa V, Cecchetti D. Influence of shade and irradiation time on the hardness of composite resins. Braz Dent J. 2007; 18:231–234.

28. Cehreli ZC, Yazici R, García-Godoy F. Effect of home-use bleaching gels on fluoride releasing restorative materials. Oper Dent. 2003; 28:605–609.

29. Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF, Tagliani P, Klersy C. In-vitro fluoride release rates from 9 orthodontic bonding adhesives. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 132:656–662.

30. Xu X, Burgess JO. Compressive strength, fluoride release and recharge of fluoride-releasing materials. Biomaterials. 2003; 24:2451–2461.

31. Lee KH, Kim HI, Kim KH, Kwon YH. Mineral loss from bovine enamel by a 30% hydrogen peroxide solution. J Oral Rehabil. 2006; 33:229–233.