Abstract
Since the advent of glass-ionomer cement as a dental restorative material, the number of clinical applications has steadily increased as both the efficiency and improved clinical outcomes for patients have been realized.
Glass-ionomer cements provide tooth-coloured restorations with a low technique sensitivity. They bond chemically to sound and caries-affected tooth structure and release levels of fluoride that protect cavosurface margins from recurrent caries attack. In a clinical environment, a more predictable bond is achieved by pretreating teeth with 37 % phosphoric acid than 20 % polyacrylic acid.
The ion exchange layer between glass-ionomer cement and dentine facilitates the remineralization of caries-affected dentine into fluorapatite that provides a caries-resistant base beneath a glass-ionomer cement restoration or lining.
Auto-cure glass-ionomer cements can be used to restore carious lesions in a tooth where the cusps are not undermined and the restoration does not involve a high-wear area such as a centric stop. Resin-modified glass-ionomer cements should be limited as restorative materials to sites that are not subject to occlusal forces, and photo-curing is able to penetrate to the base of the restoration to minimize any residual unpolymerized HEMA.
Photo-cured resin-modified glass-ionomer cements are well suited as lining materials, luting agents and dental adhesives. As dental adhesives, resin-modified glass-ionomer cements eliminate the effects of polymerization shrinkage stress of composite resins and provide a caries-resistant zone around the perimeter of the restoration.
When composite resins and auto-cure glass-ionomer cements are combined to form a “sandwich restoration”, the use of a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement adhesive as a “co-cure” intermediary between the two materials provides a time-efficient technique that effectively triples the bond strength between glass-ionomer cement and composite resin.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Brown LR, Handler SF, Horton IM, Streckfuss JL, Dreizen S. Effect of sodium fluoride on the viability and growth of Streptococcus mutans. J Dent Res. 1980;59(2):159–67.
Chow LC, Vogel GL. Enhancing remineralization. Oper Dent. 2001;Suppl 6:27–38.
Duque C, Negrini TC, Sacono NT, Spolidorio DM, de Souza Costa CA, Hebling J. Clinical and microbiological performance of resin-modified glass-ionomer liners after incomplete dentine caries removal. Clin Oral Investig. 2009;13(4):465–71.
Forsten L. Fluoride release and uptake by glass-ionomers and related materials and its clinical effect. Biomaterials. 1998;19(6):503–8.
Forsten L, Mount GJ, Knight GM. Observations in Australia of the use of glass ionomer cement restorative material. Aust Dent J. 1994;39(6):339–43.
Hamama HH, Burrow MF, Yiu C. Effect of dentine conditioning on adhesion of resin-modified glass ionomer adhesives. Aust Dent J. 2014;59(2):193–200.
Hicks J, Garcia-Godoy F, Donly K, Flaitz C. Fluoride-releasing restorative materials and secondary caries. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2003;31(3):229–45.
Hunt PR. A modified class II cavity preparation for glass ionomer restorative materials. Quintessence Int Dent Dig. 1984;15(10):1011–8.
Knight GM. The use of adhesive materials in the conservative restoration of selected posterior teeth. Aust Dent J. 1984;29(5):324–31.
Knight GM. The tunnel restoration – nine years of clinical experience using encapsulated glass ionomer cements. Case report. Aust Dent J. 1992;37(4):245–51.
Knight GM. The co-cured, light-activated glass-ionomer cement – composite resin restoration. Quintessence Int. 1994;25(2):97–100.
Knight GM, McIntyre JM, Mulyani. Bond strengths between composite resin and auto cure glass ionomer cement using the co-cure technique. Aust Dent J. 2006;51(2):175–9.
Knight GM, McIntyre JM, Craig GG, Mulyani. Electron probe microanalysis of ion exchange of selected elements between dentine and adhesive restorative materials. Aust Dent J. 2007a;52(2):128–32.
Knight GM, McIntyre JM, Craig GG, Mulyani, Zilm PS, Gully NJ. An in vitro investigation of marginal dentine caries abutting composite resin and glass ionomer cement restorations. Aust Dent J. 2007b;52(3):187–92.
Lazaridou D, Belli R, Krämer N, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U. Dental materials for primary dentition: are they suitable for occlusal restorations? A two-body wear study. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2015;16(2):165–72.
Lenzi TL, Bonifácio CC, Bönecker M, Amerongen WE, Nogueira FN, Raggio DP. Flowable glass ionomer cement layer bonding to sound and carious primary dentin. J Dent Child (Chic). 2013;80(1):20–4.
Matos AB, Oliveira DC, Vieira SN, Netto NG, Powers JM. Influence of oil contamination on in vitro bond strength of bonding agents to dental substrates. Am J Dent. 2008;21(2):101–4.
McComb D, Erickson RL, Maxymiw WG, Wood RE. A clinical comparison of glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer and resin composite restorations in the treatment of cervical caries in xerostomic head and neck radiation patients. Oper Dent. 2002;27(5):430–7.
McLean JW. Clinical applications of glass-ionomer cements. Oper Dent. 1992;Suppl 5:184–90.
Morand JM, Jonas P. Resin-modified glass-ionomer cement restoration of posterior teeth with proximal carious lesions. Quintessence Int. 1995;26(6):389–94.
Naoum SJ, Mutzelburg PR, Shumack TG, Thode DJG, Martin FE, Ellakwa A. Reducing composite restoration polymerization shrinkage stress through resin modified glass ionomer based adhesives. Aust Dent J. 2014. doi:10.1111/adj.12265 [Epub ahead of print].
Ngo HC, Mount G, McIntyre J, Tuisuva J, Von Doussa RJ. Chemical exchange between glass-ionomer restorations and residual carious dentine in permanent molars: an in vivo study. J Dent. 2006;34(8):608–13.
Nicholson JW, Aggarwal A, Czarnecka B, Limanowska-Shaw H. The rate of change of pH of lactic acid exposed to glass-ionomer dental cements. Biomaterials. 2000;21(19):1989–93.
Tantbirojn D, Rusin RP, Mitra SB. Inhibition of dentin demineralization adjacent to a glass-ionomer/composite sandwich restoration. Quintessence Int. 2009;40(4):287–94.
Tyas MJ. Placement and replacement of restorations by selected practitioners. Aust Dent J. 2005;50(2):81–9; quiz 127.
Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Vijay P, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent. 2003;28(3):215–35.
Watson TF. Fact and artefact in confocal microscopy. Adv Dent Res. 1997;11(4):433–41.
Welbury RR, Murray JJ. A clinical trial of the glass-ionomer cement-composite resin “sandwich” technique in Class II cavities in permanent premolar and molar teeth. Quintessence Int. 1990;21(6):507–12.
Wilson AD, McLean JW. Glass-ionomer cement. London: Quintessence Publishing; 1988.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Knight, G.M. (2016). The Benefits and Limitations of Glass-Ionomer Cements and Their Use in Contemporary Dentistry. In: Sidhu, S. (eds) Glass-Ionomers in Dentistry. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22626-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22626-2_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-22625-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-22626-2
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)