Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
JCR Impact Factor (IF) – 2.1
5-Year Impact Factor – 2.2
Scopus CiteScore – 3.4 (CiteScore Tracker 3.4)
Index Copernicus  – 161.11; MEiN – 140 pts

ISSN 1899–5276 (print)
ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2019, vol. 28, nr 6, June, p. 815–823

doi: 10.17219/acem/94140

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

A comparison of the remineralizing potential of dental restorative materials by analyzing their fluoride release profiles

Alicja Porenczuk1,A,B,C,D, Bartłomiej Jankiewicz2,A,D,E, Magdalena Naurecka3,B,C, Bartosz Bartosewicz2,A,B, Bartosz Sierakowski3,B,C, Dariusz Gozdowski4,C, Jerzy Kostecki5,B, Barbara Nasiłowska3,B, Agnieszka Mielczarek1,A,E,F

1 Restorative Dentistry Department, Warsaw Medical University, Poland

2 Institute of Optoelectronics, Military University of Technology, Warszawa, Poland

3 Biomedical Engineering Center, Institute of Optoelectronics, Military University of Technology, Warszawa, Poland

4 Faculty of Agriculture and Biology, Department of Experimental Design and Bioinformatics, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Poland

5 Electron Microscopy Laboratory, Institute of Optoelectronics, Military University of Technology, Warszawa, Poland


Background. The accessibility of the remineralizing ions in teeth’s environment is essential for their incorporation into caries-affected dentin. Novel bioglass-reinforced materials capable of releasing fluoride, calcium and phosphates may be particularly useful in the tissue remineralization process. A novel restorative material, ACTIVA BioActive-Restorative (Pulpdent Corp., Watertown, USA), is a hydrophilic resin-modified glassionomer cement (RMGIC) enriched with bioglass particles and fortified with a patented rubberized polymer resin. Its application in restorative dentistry may be significant, promoting remineralization of carious lesions.
Objectives. The aim of the study was to compare the fluoride ion release profiles from a bioglass-reinforced RMGIC, a conventional glass-ionomer cement (GIC) and a nanohybrid restorative polymer resin.
Material and Methods. The quantity of fluoride ions released from ACTIVA, Ketac Molar Quick Aplicap and Tetric EvoCeram was assessed using a fluoride-specific electrode. The surface characteristics of the preand post-experimental specimens were studied using a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and confocal microscope. An X-ray powder diffraction (XRD) analysis was additionally used to examine the chemical compositions of the dental materials.
Results. The greatest quantity of fluoride ions was freed from the GIC specimens (20.698–54.118 ppm), followed by the bioglass-reinforced RMGIC (from 1.236 to 15.552 ppm) and nanohybrid polymer resin (0.370–1.148 ppm). The pre-experimental specimens of the bioglass-reinforced RMGIC were porous, while the post-experimental specimens were smoother with visible micro-cracks. The XRD analysis of the bioglass particles confirmed that the material was composed mainly of fluoride (27.70 mass%), silicon (15.62 mass%), aluminum (5.91 mass%), and calcium (5.40 mass%).
Conclusion. The fluoride ion release profile of ACTIVA was lower than the GIC Keta Molar Quick Aplicap, but significantly higher than the nanohybrid restorative polymer resin Tetric EvoCeram.

Key words

fluoride, scanning electron microscopy, bioactive glass, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement, confocal microscopy

References (25)

  1. Hench LL, Splinter RJ, Allen WC, Greenlee TK. Bonding mechanisms at the interface of ceramic prosthetic materials. J Biomed Mater Res. 1971;5(6):117–141.
  2. Mousavinasab SM, Khoroushi M, Keshani F, Hashemi S. Flexural strength and morphological characteristics of resin-modified glass-ionomer cement containing bioactive glass. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2011;12(1):41–46.
  3. ten Cate JM. Contemporary perspective on the use of fluoride products in caries prevention. Brit Dent J. 2013;214(3):161–167.
  4. Garcez RM, Buzalaf MAR, de Araújo PA. Fluoride release of six restorative materials in water and pH-cycling solutions. J Appl Oral Sci. 2007;15(5):406–411.
  5. Kucukyilmaz E, Savas S, Kavrik F, Yasa B, Botsali MS. Fluoride release/recharging ability and bond strength of glass ionomer cements to sound and caries affected dentin. Niger J Clin Pract. 2017;20(2):226–234.
  6. Nicholson JW, Czarnecka B. The biocompatibility of resin-modified glass-ionomer cements for dentistry. Dent Mater. 2008;24(12):1702–1708.
  7. Van Landuyt KL, Snauwaert J, Peumans M, De Munck J, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. The role of HEMA in one-step self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater. 2008;24(10):1412–1419.
  8. Gandolfi MG, Taddei P, Siboni F, Modena E, De Stefano ED, Prati C. Biomimetic remineralization of human dentin using promising innovative calcium-silicate hybrid “smart” materials. Dent Mater. 2011;27(11):1055–1069.
  9. McCabe JF, Yan Z, Al Naimi OT, Mahmoud G, Rolland SL. Smart materials in dentistry: Future prospects. Dent Mater J. 2009;28(1):37–43.
  10. Khvostenko D, Hilton TJ, Ferracane JL, Mitchell JC, Kruzic JJ. Bioactive glass fillers reduce bacterial penetration into marginal gaps for composite restorations. Dent Mater. 2016;32(1):73–81.
  11. Pameijer CH, Garcia-Godoy F, Morrow BR, Jefferies SR. Flexural strength and flexural fatigue properties of resin-modified glass ionomers. J Clin Dent. 2015;26(1):23–27.
  12. Yan Z, Sidhu SK, Mahmoud GA, Carrick TE, McCabe JF. Effects of temperature on the fluoride release and recharging ability of glass ionomers. Oper Dent. 2007;32(2):138–143.
  13. 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(3):343–362.
  14. Mazzaoui SA, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Fluoride release from glass ionomer cements and resin composites coated with a dentin adhesive. Dent Mater. 2000;16(3):166–171.
  15. Basso GR, Della Bona Á, Gobbi DL, Cecchetti D. Fluoride release from restorative materials. Braz Dent J. 2011;22(5):355–358.
  16. Kishore G, Sai-Sankar AJ, Pratap-Gowd M, Sridhar M, Pranitha K, Sai-Krishna VS. Comparative evaluation of fluoride releasing ability of various restorative materials after the application of surface coating agents: An in vitro study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(12):ZC38–ZC41.
  17. Shah FA, Brauer DS, Hill RG, Hing KA. Apatite formation of bioactive glasses is enhanced by low additions of fluoride but delayed in the presence of serum proteins. Mater Lett. 2015;153:143–147.
  18. Davis HB, Gwinner F, Mitchell JC, Ferracane JL. Ion release from, and fluoride recharge of a composite with a fluoride-containing bioactive glass. Dent Mater. 2014;30(10):1187–1194.
  19. Mneimne M, Hill RG, Bushby AJ, Brauer DS. High phosphate content significantly increases apatite formation of fluoride-containing bioactive glasses. Acta Biomater. 2011;7(4):1827–1834.
  20. Rama Rao SB, Patri G, Agnihotri Y, Balagopal S. Fluoride and restorative materials. Int J Contemp Dent. 2011;2(3):159–164.
  21. Fúcio SB, De Paula AB, Sardi JC, Duque C, Correr-Sobrinho L, Puppin-Rontani RM. Streptococcus mutans biofilm influences on the antimicrobial properties of glass ionomer cements. Braz Dent J. 2016;27(6):681–687.
  22. Garoushi S, Vallittu PK, Lassila L. Characterization of fluoride releasing restorative dental materials. Dent Mater J. 2018;37(2):293–300.
  23. May E, Donly KJ. Fluoride release and re-release from a bioactive restorative material. Am J Dent. 2017;30(6):305–308.
  24. Awaja F, Zhang S, Tripathi M, Nikiforov A, Pugno N. Cracks, microcracks and fracture in polymer structures: Formation, detection, autonomic repair. Prog Mater Sci. 2016;83:536–573.
  25. Awaja F, Arhatari B, Wiesauer K, Leiss E, Stifter D. An investigation of the accelerated thermal degradation of different epoxy resin composites using X-ray microcomputed tomography and optical coherence tomography. Polym Degrad Stab. 2009;94(10):1814–1824.