Application of Nanomaterials in Dentistry



Over the past few years, focus on the clinical application of nanobiomaterials in dentistry has been an area of interest to researchers worldwide. Nanotechnology is currently driving dental materials industry to substantial growth [1]. The advent of nanotechnology in dentistry seems to have answers to the mysteries or problems associated with conventional materials, as they have the tendency to mimic surface and interface properties of natural tissues. Nanotechnology has as a principle the ambitious challenge of precisely controlling individual particles in nanometer range. Some of the results are very relevant and have a major impact on human life and have already been adapted [2]. While the fields of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine have hinted at much promise over the last few decades, significant amount of research is still required with the field of nanotechnology to innovate new exciting materials that can overcome drawbacks of the existing biomaterials. Nanodentistry is still considered as an emerging field with a huge potential to yield new innovative generation of technologically advanced biomaterials in prosthodontics, orthodontics, periodontics, operatives, or restorative dental sciences. It is expected that nanodentistry will eventually give rise to highly efficient, effective, and personalized dental treatment [2].


  1. 1.
    Padovani GC et al (2015) Advances in dental materials through nanotechnology: facts, perspectives and toxicological aspects. Trends Biotechnol 33:621–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Subramani K, Ahmed W, Hartsfield JK (2012) Nanobiomaterials in clinical dentistry. William Andrew, NorwichGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Curtis AR, Shortall AC, Marquis PM, Palin WM (2008) Water uptake and strength characteristics of a nanofilled resin-based composite. J Dent 36:186–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kim YS, Kwon HK, Kim BI (2011) Effect of nano-carbonate apatite to prevent re-stain after dental bleaching in vitro. J Dent 39:636–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ferracane JL (2011) Resin composite-state of the art. Dent Mater 27:29–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Xu HHK et al (2010) Strong nanocomposites with Ca, PO4, and F release for caries inhibition. J Dent Res 89:19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moraes RR et al (2012) Improved dental adhesive formulations based on reactive nanogel additives. J Dent Res 91:179–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Moraes RR et al (2011) Control of polymerization shrinkage and stress in nanogel-modified monomer and composite materials. Dent Mater 27:509–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Melo MAS, Guedes SFF, Xu HHK, Rodrigues LKA (2013) Nanotechnology-based restorative materials for dental caries management. Trends Biotechnol 31:459–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Besinis A, De Peralta T, Tredwin CJ, Handy RD (2015) Review of nanomaterials in dentistry: interactions with the oral microenvironment, clinical applications, hazards, and benefits. ACS Nano 9:2255–2289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khurshid Z et al (2015) Advances in nanotechnology for restorative dentistry. Materials (Basel) 8:717–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Paschoal MA et al (2011) Fluoride release profile of a nanofilled resin-modified glass ionomer cement. Braz Dent J 22:275–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moshaverinia A et al (2008) Modification of conventional glass-ionomer cements with N-vinylpyrrolidone containing polyacids, nano-hydroxy and fluoroapatite to improve mechanical properties. Dent Mater 24:1381–1390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Najeeb S et al (2016) Modifications in glass ionomer cements: Nano-sized fillers and bioactive nanoceramics. Int J Mol Sci 17(7):1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moshaverinia A et al (2008) Effects of incorporation of hydroxyapatite and fluoroapatite nanobioceramics into conventional glass ionomer cements (GIC). Acta Biomater 4:432–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Elsaka SE, Hamouda IM, Swain MV (2011) Titanium dioxide nanoparticles addition to a conventional glass-ionomer restorative: Influence on physical and antibacterial properties. J Dent 39:589–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Garcia-Contreras R et al (2015) Mechanical, antibacterial and bond strength properties of nano-titanium-enriched glass ionomer cement. J Appl Oral Sci 23:321–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gu YW, Yap AUJ, Cheang P, Khor KA (2005) Effects of incorporation of HA/ZrO2 into glass ionomer cement (GIC). Biomaterials 26:713–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Katz A, Redlich M, Rapoport L, Wagner HD, Tenne R (2006) Self-lubricating coatings containing fullerene-like WS2 nanoparticles for orthodontic wires and other possible medical applications. Tribol Lett 21:135–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wiltshire WA (1996) Determination of fluoride from fluoride-releasing elastomeric ligature ties. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 110:383–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lapatki BG, Bartholomeyczik J, Ruther P, Jonas IE, Paul O (2007) Smart bracket for multi-dimensional force and moment measurement. J Dent Res 86:73–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yang J, Yuan G, Chen Z (2016) Pulp regeneration: Current approaches and future challenges. Front Physiol 7:58Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yassen GH, Chu TMG, Eckert G, Platt JA (2013) Effect of medicaments used in endodontic regeneration technique on the chemical structure of human immature radicular dentin: an in vitro study. J Endod 39:269–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Murray PE, Garcia-Godoy F, Hargreaves KM (2007) Regenerative endodontics: a review of current status and a call for action. J Endod 33:377–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kanaparthy R, Kanaparthy A (2011) The changing face of dentistry: nanotechnology. Int J Nanomedicine 6:2799–2804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shetty NJ, Swati P, David K (2013) Nanorobots: future in dentistry. Saudi Dent J 25:49–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Freitas RAJ (2000) Nanodentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 131:1559–1565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bottino MC et al (2013) A novel three-dimensional scaffold for regenerative endodontics: materials and biological characterizations. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bottino MC et al (2012) Recent advances in the development of GTR/GBR membranes for periodontal regeneration—a materials perspective. Dent Mater 28:703–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Albuquerque MT, Valera MC, Nakashima M, Nor JE, Bottino MC (2014) Tissue-engineering-based strategies for regenerative endodontics. J Dent Res 93:1222–1231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Welch K, Cai YL, Engqvist H, Stromme M (2010) Dental adhesives with bioactive and on-demand bactericidal properties. Dent Mater 26:491–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ouyang XB et al (2011) Synthesis and characterization of triethylene glycol dimethacrylate nanocapsules used in a self-healing bonding resin. J Dent 39:825–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tomsia AP, Lee JS, Wegst UGK, Saiz E (2013) Nanotechnology for dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 28:E535–E546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tomsia AP et al (2011) Nanotechnology approaches to improve dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 26:25–44Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Le Guehennec L, Soueidan A, Layrolle P, Amouriq Y (2007) Surface treatments of titanium dental implants for rapid osseointegration. Dent Mater 23:844–854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mendonca G, Mendonca DBS, Aragao FJL, Cooper LF (2008) Advancing dental implant surface technology - From micron- to nanotopography. Biomaterials 29:3822–3835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shokuhfar T (2014) Recent progress toward surface modification of bone/dental implants with titanium and zirconia dioxide nanotubes. J Nanotech Smart Mater 1:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zhang L, Han Y (2010) Effect of nanostructured titanium on anodization growth of self-organized TiO2 nanotubes. Nanotechnology 21(5):055602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cooper LF et al (2006) Fluoride modification effects on osteoblast behavior and bone formation at TiO2 grit-blasted c.p. titanium endosseous implants. Biomaterials 27:926–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Stavroullakis A et al (2015) Dental implant surface treatments may modulate cytokine secretion in Porphyromonas gingivalis-stimulated human gingival fibroblasts: a comparative study. J Biomed Mater Res A 103:1131–1140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Qasim SB, Najeeb S, Delaine-Smith RM, Rawlinson A, Ur Rehman I (2016) Potential of electrospun chitosan fibers as a surface layer in functionally graded GTR membrane for periodontal regeneration. Dent Mater 33:71–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Qasim SB et al (2016) In-vitro and in-vivo degradation studies of freeze gelated porous chitosan composite scaffolds for tissue engineering applications. Polym Degrad Stab. Scholar
  43. 43.
    Qasim SB, Delaine-Smith RM, Fey T, Rawlinson A, Rehman IU (2015) Freeze gelated porous membranes for periodontal tissue regeneration. Acta Biomater 23:317–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Bottino MC et al (2013) Bioactive nanofibrous scaffolds for regenerative endodontics. J Dent Res 92:963–969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Siddiqui N, Pramanik K (2014) Effects of micro and nano β-TCP fillers in freeze-gelled chitosan scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. J Appl Polym Sci 131. doi:  10.1002/app.41025
  46. 46.
    Hong Z et al (2010) Mono-dispersed bioactive glass nanospheres: Preparation and effects on biomechanics of mammalian cells. J Biomed Mater Res A 95:747–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Baino F, Novajra G, Vitale-Brovarone C (2015) Bioceramics and scaffolds: a winning combination for tissue engineering. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 3:202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Zahid S et al (2016) Biological behavior of bioactive glasses and their composites. RSC Adv 6(74):70197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Piñón-Segundo E, Ganem-Quintanar A, Alonso-Pérez V, Quintanar-Guerrero D (2005) Preparation and characterization of triclosan nanoparticles for periodontal treatment. Int J Pharm 294:217–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Paquette DW, Hanlon A, Lessem J, Williams RC (2004) Clinical relevance of adjunctive minocycline microspheres in patients with chronic periodontitis: secondary analysis of a phase 3 trial. J Periodontol 75:531–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kong LX, Peng Z, Li SD, Bartold PM (2000) Nanotechnology and its role in the management of periodontal diseases. Periodontology 40:184–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Tran N, Webster TJ (2009) Nanotechnology for bone materials. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 1:336–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Jones JR (2013) Review of bioactive glass: from Hench to hybrids. Acta Biomater 9:4457–4486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Polini A, Bai H, Tomsia AP (2013) Dental applications of nanostructured bioactive glass and its composites. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 5:399–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Panseri S et al (2016) Biomimetic scaffold with aligned microporosity designed for dentin regeneration. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 4:48CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Restorative and Prosthetic Dental SciencesCollege of Dentistry, Dar Al Uloom UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Kroto Research InstituteUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations