Gill N C, Pathak A
Department of Pedodontics & Preventive Dentistry, Dr. HSJ Institute of Dental Sciences & Hospital, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India.
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2010 Jul-Sep;28(3):193-9. doi: 10.4103/0970-4388.73784.
Topical fluorides can recharge the fluoride content of exhausted glass ionomer cements, converting them into fluoride reservoirs. However, the high reactivity of fluoride agents used in topical fluorides may result in the deterioration of surface properties of these restorations.
To evaluate and compare the effect of topical fluorides on the microhardness of conventional glass ionomer cements (Fuji II,GC Corporation,Tokyo, Japan and Ketac Fil Plus,3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany), high viscosity conventional glass ionomer cements (Ketac Molar Easymix, 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany and Fuji IX GP, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), and resin-modified glass ionomer cements (Vitremer, 3M ESPE, St.Paul, MN, USA and Fuji II LC, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan).
Twenty-one pellets were made of each material and stored in distilled water at 37°C for 48 h. These were then randomly divided into 3 subgroups of 7 pellets each. One subgroup was treated by 4 min application of 1.23% acidulated phosphate fluoride (APF) gel, other subgroup with 2% sodium fluoride (NaF) gel, and the third subgroup was used as control. Thereafter, all the pellets were subjected to microhardness testing (load = 100 g for 15 s).
APF gel of 1.23% produced a statistically significant decrease in microhardness (P<0.05) of all the restorative materials as compared with restorative materials used as control. The decrease in the microhardness was more pronounced in conventional glass ionomer cements and least pronounced in resin-modified glass ionomer cements. No statistically significant difference (P > 0.05) in microhardness was found after NaF treatment in all the restorative materials tested as compared with control subgroups.
The use of 1.23% APF gel may be detrimental to the long-term durability of glass ionomer restorations.
局部用氟化物可使耗尽氟的玻璃离子水门汀重新补充氟含量,将其转变为氟储存库。然而,局部用氟化物中所使用的氟化物制剂的高反应性可能导致这些修复体表面性能的恶化。
评估并比较局部用氟化物对传统玻璃离子水门汀(日本东京GC公司的Fuji II、德国Seefeld 3M ESPE公司的Ketac Fil Plus)、高粘度传统玻璃离子水门汀(德国Seefeld 3M ESPE公司的Ketac Molar Easymix、日本东京GC公司的Fuji IX GP)以及树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀(美国明尼苏达州圣保罗3M ESPE公司的Vitremer、日本东京GC公司的Fuji II LC)显微硬度的影响。
每种材料制作21个小球,并在37℃蒸馏水中储存48小时。然后将它们随机分为3个亚组,每组7个小球。一个亚组用1.23%的酸化磷酸氟(APF)凝胶处理4分钟,另一个亚组用2%的氟化钠(NaF)凝胶处理,第三个亚组用作对照。此后,对所有小球进行显微硬度测试(载荷=100克,持续15秒)。
与用作对照的修复材料相比,1.23%的APF凝胶使所有修复材料的显微硬度出现统计学上的显著降低(P<0.05)。传统玻璃离子水门汀的显微硬度降低更为明显,而树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀的降低最不明显。与对照亚组相比,在所有测试的修复材料中,NaF处理后显微硬度未发现统计学上的显著差异(P>0.05)。
使用1.23%的APF凝胶可能对玻璃离子修复体的长期耐久性有害。