IADR Abstract Archives
Invitro Evaluation of Glass Ionomer Materials for Atraumatic Restorative Therapy
Objectives: To compare the micro-shear bond strength (μSBS) of glass ionomer cements (GIC), and conventional composite resin for atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) under different conditions of saliva contamination.
Methods: 40 caries-free human molars were collected and divided into four groups [control group (CG): composite resin; Treatment group (TG1): Conventional GIC, TG2: Light-curing GIC, TG3: GIC with a bio-union filler. Each material group was further divided into two subgroups [a: mild saliva contamination (MSC), and b: severe saliva contamination (SSC)]. The fillings were restored in tube at superficial dentin (S-D) and deep dentin (D-D) levels, under caries-free (CF) and caries-induced (CI) conditions. All restorations were tested in a universal testing machine and the failure mode was evaluated under a photomicroscope. ANOVA, post-hoc and Mantel-Cox tests were applied for statistical analyses (p<0.05).
Results: SSC significantly reduced bond strength of CG (p=0.0305) and TG1 (p=0.0445) compared to MSC. The saliva condition did not affect bond strength of TG2 and TG3. Bond strengths of CG, TG1, and TG2 were reduced in D-D (CG: p<0.0001; TG1: p<0.0001; TG2: p=0.0001) when compared to S-D. Bond strength of TG3 was not affected by the dentine site. Caries-free and caries-induced conditions did not affect bond strength of any of the groups.
Conclusions: Glass-ionomer cements with bio-union fillers seem to be perform better in deep dentin sites with severe saliva in quasi bench-experiment setups. Further research is warranted to confirm these findings in a clinical scenario.
Methods: 40 caries-free human molars were collected and divided into four groups [control group (CG): composite resin; Treatment group (TG1): Conventional GIC, TG2: Light-curing GIC, TG3: GIC with a bio-union filler. Each material group was further divided into two subgroups [a: mild saliva contamination (MSC), and b: severe saliva contamination (SSC)]. The fillings were restored in tube at superficial dentin (S-D) and deep dentin (D-D) levels, under caries-free (CF) and caries-induced (CI) conditions. All restorations were tested in a universal testing machine and the failure mode was evaluated under a photomicroscope. ANOVA, post-hoc and Mantel-Cox tests were applied for statistical analyses (p<0.05).
Results: SSC significantly reduced bond strength of CG (p=0.0305) and TG1 (p=0.0445) compared to MSC. The saliva condition did not affect bond strength of TG2 and TG3. Bond strengths of CG, TG1, and TG2 were reduced in D-D (CG: p<0.0001; TG1: p<0.0001; TG2: p=0.0001) when compared to S-D. Bond strength of TG3 was not affected by the dentine site. Caries-free and caries-induced conditions did not affect bond strength of any of the groups.
Conclusions: Glass-ionomer cements with bio-union fillers seem to be perform better in deep dentin sites with severe saliva in quasi bench-experiment setups. Further research is warranted to confirm these findings in a clinical scenario.