Email this article Self-adhesive, bulk-fill bioactive materials as an alternative to silver amalgam in restorative dentistry
Abstract
Introduction: The disadvantages of silver amalgam fillings and the growing social requirements for the widespread availability of not only durable but also aesthetic dental fillings have contributed to the search for another basic restorative material that retains the advantages of silver amalgam and eliminates its disadvantages.
The aim of the study is to present, on the basis of a literature review, the basic structure, properties and indications for the use of dental materials used in direct restorative dentistry, as well as new self-adhesive hybrid materials with simplified application technique. These are: Activa BioActive Restorative (Pulpdent; AB), Cention N (Ivoclar-Vivadent; CN), and SureFil One (Dentsply Sirona; SO). Basic information on the chemical structure and basic indications for the use of these materials were presented.
Conclusions: The presented new materials are evolutionary products based on conventional glass ionomer cements (GIC), resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC) and composite materials. The chemical structure and reactions that occur during the binding of AB and SO materials are similar to some RM-GIC, while in the case of CN material similar to fluorine-releasing resin-based materials. Previous studies do not confirm that the new materials have mechanical properties necessary to meet the requirements for posterior restorations. Considering limited clinical trials, care should be taken in their systematic application in all patients. There are no unequivocal studies confirming the bioactivity of the materials. Further in vitro studies as well as clinical observations to assess their chemical properties and the ability to induce remineralization and bioactivity are needed. The materials show self-adhesion but when included in the protocol of a bonding system, their adhesion to hard tissues is better.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Czarnetzki A, Ehrhardt S. Re-dating the Chinese amalgam-filling of teeth in Europe. Int J Anthropol 1990;5(4):325-32.
Westcott A. Report of the Onondaga County Medical Society, on “Mineral Paste”. Am J Dent Sci 1844;4(3):175-201.
Bharti R, Wadhwani KK, Tikku AP, Chandra A. Dental amalgam: an update. J Conserv Dent 2010;13(4):204-8.
Francois P, Fouquet V, Attal JP, Dursun E. Commercially available fluoride-releasing retorative materials: a review and a proposal for classification. Materials (Basel) 2020;13(10):2313.
Anusavice KJ, Phillips RW. Phillips’ science of dental materials. St. Louis: Saundres; 2003.
Science for environment policy. In-depth report 15: tackling mercury pollution in the EU and worldwide. Brussels: European Commission; 2017. p. 72.
van Meerbeek B, Frankenberger R. Editorial: on our way towards self-adhesive restorative materials? J Adhes Dent 2019;21(4):295-6.
Wilson AD, Kent BE. The glass-ionomer cement. A new translucent dental filling material. J Appl Chem Biotechnol 2007;21(11):313.
Hurrell-Gillingham K, Reaney IM, Miller CA, Crawford A, Hatton PV. Devitrification of ionomer glass and its effect on the in vitro biocompatibility of glass-ionomer cements. Biomaterials 2003;24(18):3153-60.
Sidhu SK, Nicholson JW. A review of glass-ionomer cements for clinical dentistry. J Funct Biomater 2016;7(3):16.
Najeeb S, Khurshid Z, Zafar MS, Khan AS, Zohaib S, Martí JMN, et al. Modifications in glass ionomer cements: nano-sized fillers and bioactive nanoceramics. Int J Mol Sci 2016;17(7):1134.
Prabhakar AR, Sekhar VR, Kurthukoti AJ. Leaching of ions from materials used in alternative restorative technique under neutral and acidic conditions: a comparative evaluation. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2009;34(2):125-30.
Watson TF, Atmeh AR, Sajini S, Cook RJ, Festy F. Present and future of glass-ionomers and calcium-silicate cements as bioactive materials in dentistry: biophotonics-based interfacial analyses in health and disease. Dent Mater 2014;30(1):50-61.
Momoi Y, Hirosaki K, Kohno A, McCabe JF. Flexural properties of resin-modified “hybrid” glass-ionomers in comparison with conventional acid-base glass-ionomers. Dent Mater J 1995;14(2):109-19.
de Gee AJ, van Duinen RN, Werner A, Davidson CL. Early and long-term wear of conventional and resin-modified glass ionomers. J Dent Res 1996;75(8):1613-9.
Mickenautsch S. High-viscosity glass-ionomer cements for direct posterior tooth restorations in permanent teeth: the evidence in brief. J Dent 2016;55:121-3.
Guggenberger R, May R, Stefan KP. New trends in glass-ionomer chemistry. Biomaterials 1998;19(6):479-83.
Yap AUJ, Pek YS, Cheang P. Physico-mechanical properties of a fast-set highly viscous GIC restorative. J Oral Rehabil 2003;30(1):1-8.
Wilson AD, Hill RG, Warrens CP, Lewis BG. The influence of polyacid molecular weight on some properties of glass-ionomer cements. J Dent Res 1989;68(2):89-94.
de Caluwé T, Vercruysse CWJ, Fraeyman S, Verbeeck RMH. The influence of particle size and fluorine content of aluminosilicate glass on the glass ionomer cement properties. Dent Mater 2014;30(9):1029-38.
Pires RA, Nunes TG, Abrahams I, Hawkes GE. The role of aluminium and silicon in the setting chemistry of glass ionomer cements. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2008;19(4):1687-92.
Corralo DJ, Maltz M. Clinical and ultrastructural effects of different liners/restorative materials on deep carious dentin: a randomized clinical trial. Caries Res 2013;47(3):243-50.
Frankenberger R, Sindel J, Krämer N. Viscous glass-ionomer cements: a new alternative to amalgam in the primary dentition? Quintessence Int 1997;28(10):667-76.
Oral O, Lassila LV, Kumbuloglu O, Vallittu PK. Bioactive glass particulate filler composite: Effect of coupling of fillers and filler loading on some physical properties. Dent Mater 2014;30(5):570-7.
Nakornchai N, Arksornnukit M, Kamonkhantikul K, Takahashi H. The pH effect of solvent in silanization on fluoride released and mechanical properties of heat-cured acrylic resin containing fluoride-releasing filler. Dent Mater J 2016;35(3):440-6.
Itota T, Nakatsuka T, Tanaka K, Tashiro Y, McCabe JF, Yoshiyama M. Neutralizing effect by resin-based materials containing silane-coated glass fillers. Dent Mater J 2010;29(4):362-8.
Miyata N, Matsuura W, Kokubo T, Nakamura T. Mechanical behavior of bioactive composite cements consisting of resin and glass-ceramic powder in a simulated body fluid: effect of silane coupling agent. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2004;15(9):1013-20.
Moberg M, Brewster J, Nicholson J, Roberts H. Physical property investigation of contemporary glass ionomer and resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig 2019;23(3):1295-308.
Berzins DW, Abey S, Costache MC, Wilkie CA, Roberts HW. Resin-modified glass-ionomer setting reaction competition. J Dent Res 2010;89(1):82-6.
Mustafa R, Alshali RZ, Silikas N. The effect of desiccation on water sorption, solubility and hygroscopic volumetric expansion of dentine replacement materials. Dent Mater 2018;34(8):e205-13.
Cattani-Lorente MA, Dupuis V, Moya F, Payan J, Meyer JM. Comparative study of the physical properties of a polyacid-modified composite resin and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement. Dent Mater 1999;15(1):21-32.
Mousavinasab SM, Meyers I. Fluoride release by glass ionomer cements, compomer and giomer. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2009;6(2):75-81.
Nigam AG, Jaiswal J, Murthy R, Pandey R. Estimation of fluoride release from various dental materials in different media – an in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2009;2(1):1-8.
Zhou SL, Zhou J, Watanabe S, Watanabe K, Wen LY, Xuan K. In vitro study of the effects of fluoride-releasing dental materials on remineralization in an enamel erosion model. J Dent 2012;40(3):255-63.
Opal S, Garg S, Sharma D, Dhindsa A, Jatana I. In vivo effect of calcium hydroxide and resin-modified glass ionomer cement on carious dentin in young permanent molars: an ultrastructural and macroscopic study. Pediatr Dent 2017;39(1):1-8.
Peutzfeldt A. Compomers and glass ionomers: bond strength to dentin and mechanical properties. Am J Dent 1996;9(6):259-63.
de Gee AJ, van Duinen RN, Werner A, Davidson CL. Early and long-term wear of conventional and resin-modified glass ionomers. J Dent Res 1996;75(8):1613-9.
Opdam NJM, Bronkhorst EM, Roeters JM, Loomans BAC. Longevity and reasons for failure of sandwich and total-etch posterior composite resin restorations. J Adhes Dent 2007;9(5):469-75.
Boing TF, de Geus JL, Wambier LM, Loguercio AD, Reis A, Gomes OMM. Are glass-ionomer cement restorations in cervical lesions more long-lasting than resin-based composite resins? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Adhes Dent 2018;20(5):435-52.
Peutzfeldt A. Resin composites in dentistry: the monomer systems. Eur J Oral Sci 1997;105(2):97-116.
Pratap B, Gupta RK, Bhardwaj B, Nag M. Resin based restorative dental materials: characteristics and future perspectives. Jpn Dent Sci Rev 2019;55(1):126-38.
Ferracane JL. Resin composite – state of the art. Dent Mater 2011;27(1):29-38.
Bayne SC. Beginnings of the dental composite revolution. J Am Dent Assoc 2013;144(8):880-4.
Vallittu PK, Boccaccini AR, Hupa L, Watts DC. Bioactive dental materials – do they exist and what does bioactivity mean? Dent Mater 2018;34(5):693-4.
Nicholson JW. Polyacid-modified composite resins (“compomers”) and their use in clinical dentistry. Dent Mater 2007;23(5):615-22.
Young AM, Rafeeka SA, Howlett JA. FTIR investigation of monomer polymerisation and polyacid neutralisation kinetics and mechanisms in various aesthetic dental restorative materials. Biomaterials 2004;25(5):823-33.
Musanje L, Shu M, Darvell BW. Water sorption and mechanical behaviour of cosmetic direct restorative materials in artificial saliva. Dent Mater 2001;17(5):394-401.
Ilie N, Hickel R. Investigations on mechanical behaviour of dental composites. Clin Oral Investig 2009;13(4):427-38.
Mass E, Hassan A, Zilberman U. Long-term in vivo effect of various restorative materials on enamel and dentin of primary molars. Quintessence Int 2017;48(8):633-8.
de la Peña VA, Darriba IL, Valea MC. Long-term clinical evaluation of Dyract compomer in the restoration of non-caries cervical lesions: a 20-year retrospective study. Quintessence Int 2017;48(9):689-94.
van Dijken JW. 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite in Class III restorations. Am J Dent 1996;9(5):195-8.
Gonulol N, Ozer S, Tunç ES. Water sorption, solubility, and color stability of gGiomer restoratives. J Esthet Restor Dent 2015;27(5):300-6.
Ikemura K, Tay FR, Endo T, Pashley DH. A review of chemical-approach and ultramorphological studies on the development of fluoride-releasing dental adhesives comprising new pre-reacted glass ionomer (PRG) fillers. Dent Mater J 2008;27(3):315-39.
Ruivo MA, Pacheco RR, Sebold M, Giannini M. Surface roughness and filler particles characterization of resin-based composites. Microsc Res Tech 2019;82(10):1756-67.
PulpDent® Corporation. ActivaTM BioACTIVE. A closer look at BioACTIVE Materials. https://www.pulpdent.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ACTIVA-White-Paper-XF-VWP6-REV-06-2017-3.pdf (13.04.2022).
Scientific Documentation: Cention N. https://downloadcenter.ivoclar.com/#search-text=cention%20n&details=23015 (13.04.2022).
McNaught AD, Wilkinson A, editors. IUPAC. Compendium of Chemical Terminology (the “Gold Book”). Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications;1997.
Scientific Manual. Surefil oneTM. Self-Adhesive composite hybrid. https://assets.dentsplysirona.com/flagship/en/explore/restorative/surefil-one/RES-Scientific-Compendium-Surefil-one-EN.pdf (13.04.2022).
Lohbauer U, Belli R. The mechanical performance of a novel self-adhesive restorative material. J Adhes Dent 2020;22(1):47-58.
Garoushi S, Vallittu PK, Lassila L. Characterization of fluoride releasing restorative dental materials. Dent Mater J 2018;37(2):293-300.
May E, Donly KJ. Fluoride release and re-release from a bioactive restorative material. Am J Dent 2017;30(6):305-8.
Kunert M, Lukomska-Szymanska M. Bio-inductive matrials in direct and indirect pulp capping – a review article. Materials (Basel) 2020;13(5):1204.
Poreńczuk A, Jankiewicz B, Naurecka M, Bartosewicz B, Sierakowski B, Gozdowski D, et al. A comparison of the remineralizing potential of dental restorative materials by analyzing their fluoride release profiles. Adv Clin Exp Med 2019;28(6):815-23.
Tiskaya M, Al-Eesa NA, Wong FSL, Hill RG. Characterization of the bioactivity of two commercial composites. Dent Mater 2019;35(12):1757-68.
Paul S, Raina A, Kour S, Mishra S, Bansal M, Sengupta A. Comparative evaluation of fluoride release and re-release and recharge potential of Zirconomer Improved and Cention. J Conserv Dent 2020;23(4):402-6.
Rai S, Kumari RA, Meena N. Comparative assessment of fluoride release and recharge through newer fluoride releasing posterior restorative materials: an in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2019;22(6):544-7.
van Dijken JWV, Pallesen U, Benetti A. A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity. Dent Mater 2019;35(2):335-43.
Bhadra D, Shah NC, Rao AS, Dedania MS, Bajpai N. A 1-year comparative evaluation of clinical performance of nanohybrid composite with ActivaTM bioactive composite in Class II carious lesion: A randomized control study. J Conserv Dent 2019;22(1):92-6.
François P, Remadi A, Le Goff S, Abdel-Gawad S, Attal JP, Dursun E. Flexural properties and dentin adhesion in recently developed self-adhesive bulk-fill materials. J Oral Sci 2021;63(2):139-44.
Garcia-Godoy F, Morrow BR. Wear resistance of new ACTIVA compared to other restorative materials. J Dent Res 2015;94:3522.
Chowdhury D, Guha C, Desai P. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of dental amalgam, Z350 composite resin and Cention N restoration in Class II cavity. IOSR J Dent Med Scien 2018;17(4):52-4.
Dedania MS, Shah NC, Bhandra D, Bajpai N, Sapariya K. One year comparative evaluation of clinical performance of silver amalgam and Cention N in simple Class I carious lesions in permanent molars-a split mouth randomized control study. Int J Curr Res 2018:10(8):72993-6.
Minocha A, Sharma V, Gupta A, Sharma N. Comparative evaluation of Cention N and Amalgam in Class II posterior restorations . Univ J Dent Sci 2021;7(1):58-61.
Kaur M, Mann NS, Jhamb A, Batra D. A comparative evaluation of compressive strength of Cention N with glass Ionomer cement: an in vitro study. Int J Appl Dent Sci 2019;5(1):5-9.
Iftikhar N, Devashish, Srivastava B, Gupta N, Ghambir N, Rashi-Singh. A comparative evaluation of mechanical properties of four different restorative materials: an in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2019;12(1):47-9
Pathak AK, Mallikarjuna K. An in vitro comparative evaluation of compressive strength, diametral tensile strength, and shear bond strength of type II glass ionomer cement, type IX glass ionomer cement, and Cention N on primary molars. J Interdiscip Dentistry 2021;11(2):57-61.
Biswas I, Shil R, Mazumdar P, Desai P. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of dental amalgam, Dyract-XP composite resin and Cention-N restoration in class I cavity. Int J Innovat Res Dent Sci 2018;3(2):384-92.
Frankenberger R, Dudek MC, Winter J, Braun A, Krämer N, von Stein-Lausnitz M, et al. Amalgam alternatives critically evaluated: effect of long-term termomechanical loading on marginal quality, wear and fracture behavior. J Adhes Dent 2020;22(1):107-16.
Sahoo SK, Meshram GR, Parihar AS, Pitalia D, Vasudevan H, Surana A. Evaluation of effect of dietary solvents on bond strength of compomer, ormocer, nanocomposite and Activa Bioactive Restorative Materials. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2019;9(5):453-7.
Latta MA, Tsujimoto A, Takamizawa T, Barkmeier WW. In vitro wear resistance of self-adhesive restorative materials. J Adhes Dent 2020;22(1):59-64.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21164/pomjlifesci.840
Copyright (c) 2022 Ryta Łagocka, Magdalena Skoczyk-Jaworska, Małgorzata Mazurek
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/pl/