Comparison of Fluoride Release and Microhardness between Restorative Materials
10.5856/JKDS.2024.17.3.105
- Author:
Eui-Jin CHA
1
;
Myeong-Kwan JIH
;
Kyeol-Koh
;
Tae-Young PARK
Author Information
1. Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Chosun University , Gwangju, Korea
- Publication Type:ORIGINAL ARTICLE
- From:Journal of Korean Dental Science
2024;17(3):105-111
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Purpose:Research comparing and evaluating the properties of various dental materials is an important topic in the field of dentistry. This study aims to evaluate the fluoride release and microhardness properties of various fluoride-containing restorative materials used in dental treatments.
Materials and Methods:Thirty specimens of four restorative materials were pre-pared (5 mm × 2 mm, cylindrical): alkasite-based material (Cention N, CN), Self-cure glass Ionomer (Riva self cure, RS), Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji LC II, FL) and composite resin (Filtek Z350XT, FZ). Fluoride release measurements were conducted on 25 specimens at intervals of 1, 2, 6, 13, 20, and 27 days with a fluoride electrode connected to the pH/ISE Meter (Orion Star A214, Thermo Scientific, USA) and cumulative fluoride release was calculated. Vickers microhardness measurements were performed on five specimens from each material with microhardness tester (DM2D, AFFRI, Italy).
Results:As a result of measuring the amount of fluoride release over 27 days, the amount of fluoride release in CN showed a gradual increase, while the amount of fluoride release in RS, FL, and FZ gradually decreased. The cumulative fluoride release amount for 28 days was significantly higher in CN and FL than in RS (P < 0.05). FZ and RS demonstrated significantly higher microhardness compared to CN and FL (P < 0.05). FZ and RS showed similar microhardness, and FL showed the lowest microhardness.
Conclusion:Cention N (CN) exhibited superior fluoride release compared to Glass Ionomer Cement (RS), making it a promising option for preventing secondary caries. However, it displayed a lower microhardness than the composite resin (FZ), indicating potential limitations in terms of mechanical strength. Therefore, if an anti-caries action is required, Cention N may be considered first; however, it appears to be difficult to use in posterior permanent teeth.
