Improving the band-tooth bond integrity by glass ionomer cement (GIC) is essential in orthodontic treatments. As, microleakage under bands induced enamel demineralization. Storing the dental material to updated magnets improved their mechanical properties. This research aimed to assess the microleakage of GIC after storing in a static magnetic field (SMF).
Material and Methods:
Forty premolars and their suitable bands were randomly classified into two main groups according to the types of GIC tested in this research; resin-modified GIC (RMGIC) and conventional GIC (CGIC). Each group was subdivided according to the exposure to SMF before polymerization into two subgroups. CGIC not exposed to SMF (CC), CGIC exposed to SMF (CM), RMGIC not exposed to SMF (LC) and RMGIC exposed to SMF (LM). SMF intensity performed was 0.225 Tesla, exposed for 48 hours at room temperature. The entire tube of RMGIC was inserted in SMF, where the powder of CGIC was stored in SMF. The microleakage under the band was evaluated under a 20× stereomicroscope by dye penetration technique at the cement band interface. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for data analysis, p ≤ .05.
Results:
The main (SD) microleakage of GIC reduced significantly (p = .043) after being exposed to SMF from 3.1950 (0.632) mm to 1.7095 (0.1176) mm and from 0.8745 (0.1104) mm to 0.6430(0.094) mm for CGIC and RMGIC, respectively.
Conclusion:
Storing the CGIC powder in (0.225 T) SMF improves band-tooth bond integrity. Additionally, the preservation of RMGIC in SMF minimized the microleakage under orthodontic bands.
GojeSK, SangolgiVK, NeelaP, . A comparison of resistance to enamel demineralization after banding with four orthodontic cements: an in vitro study. J Indian Orthod Soc, 2012; 46: 141–147.
2.
MasarykovaN, TkadlecE, ChlupZ, . Comparison of microleakage under orthodontic brackets bonded with five different adhesive systems: in vitro study. BMC Oral Health, 2023; 23(1): 637. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03368-2. PMID: 37670283; PMCID: PMC10478400.
3.
YacoutYM, NabawyYA, El-HarouniNM, . Shear bond strength of metallic brackets bonded to enamel pretreated with CPP-ACP: a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies. BMC Oral Health, 2023; 23(1): 440. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03103-x. PMID: 37393280.
4.
ZhuK, ZhengL, XingJ, . Mechanical, antibacterial, biocompatible and microleakage evaluation of glass ionomer cement modified by nanohydroxyapatite/polyhexamethylene biguanide. Dent Mater J, 2022; 41(2): 197–208. doi: https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2021-096. PMID: 34759126.
5.
WilsonAD, KentBE. A new translucent cement for dentistry. The glass ionomer cement. Br Dent J, 1972; 132(4): 133–135. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4802810. PMID: 4501690.
6.
Zandi KarimiA, RezabeigiE, DrewRAL. Aluminum-free glass ionomer cements containing 45S5 Bioglass→ and its bioglass-ceramic. J Mater Sci Mater Med, 2021; 32(7): 76. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-021-06553-3. PMID: 34156576.
7.
PulgaonkarR, ChitraP. Stereomicroscopic analysis of microleakage, evaluation of shear bond strengths and adhesive remnants beneath orthodontic brackets under cyclic exposure to commonly consumed commercial “soft” drinks. Indian J Dent Res, 2021; 32(1): 98–103. doi: https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_936_18. PMID: 34269245.
8.
BhushanR, JeriSY, NarayanamurthyS, . Assessment of microleakage under stainless steel orthodontic brackets bonded with various adhesive systems: an in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract, 2021; 22(6): 620–623. PMID: 34393117.
9.
MenesesIHC, SampaioGAM, CarvalhoFG, . In vivo biocompatibility, mechanical, and antibacterial properties of cements modified with propolis in different concentrations. Eur J Dent, 2020; 14(1): 77–84. doi: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1702255. PMID: 32168534.
10.
LewWZ, FengSW, LeeSY, . The review of bioeffects of static magnetic fields on the oral tissue-derived cells and its application in regenerative medicine. Cells, 2021; 10(10): 2662. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/cells10102662. PMID: 34685642.
11.
KatariaVG, PatelMC, BhattR, . Clinical and radiographic evaluation of different glass ionomer restorative materials in primary molars: a comparative randomized clinical trial. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent, 2023; 16(6): 829–836. doi: https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2709. PMID: 38344373.
12.
Al QassarSS, TaqaAA, MohiaaldenHK. Can the static magnetic field improve orthodontic adhesive polymerization?J Int Dent Med Res, 2021; 14(1): 67–73.
13.
ShankarP, VenkatesanR, SenthilD, . Microleakage patterns of glass ionomer cement at cement-band and cement-enamel interfaces in primary teeth. Indian J Dent Res, 2020; 31(2): 291–296. doi: https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_850_19. PMID: 32436911.
14.
de Morais SampaioGA, Lacerda-SantosR, CavalcantiYW, . Antimicrobial properties, mechanics, and fluoride release of ionomeric cements modified by red propolis. Angle Orthod, 2021; 91(4): 522–527. doi: https://doi.org/10.2319/083120-759.1. PMID: 33630071.
15.
GillgrassTJ, MillettDT, CreanorSL, . Fluoride release, microbial inhibition and microleakage pattern of two orthodontic band cements. J Dent, 1999; 27(6): 455–461. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0300-5712(99)00003-2. PMID: 10399413.
16.
OmidkhodaM, HeraviF, GharaeiS, . Incorporation of amorphous calcium phosphate (ACP) into glass ionomer cement: influence on microleakage of cemented orthodontic bands. Biomed Res-India, 2017; 28(2): 616–619.
17.
KashaniM, FarhadiS, RastegarfardN. Comparison of the effect of three cements on prevention of enamel demineralization adjacent to orthodontic bands. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects, 2012; 6(3): 89–93. doi: https://doi.org/10.5681/joddd.2012.019. Epub PMID: 22991644.
18.
FrancoisP, FouquetV, AttalJP, . Commercially available fluoride-releasing restorative materials: a review and a proposal for classification. Materials (Basel), 2020; 13(10): 2313. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13102313. PMID: 32443424.
19.
HedayatiZ, FarjoodA. Evaluation of microleakage under orthodontic brackets bonded with nanocomposites. Contemp Clin Dent, 2018; 9(3): 361–366. doi: https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_69_18. PMID: 30166827.
20.
UysalT, UlkerM, RamogluSI, . Microleakage under metallic and ceramic brackets bonded with orthodontic self-etching primer systems. Angle Orthod, 2008; 78(6): 1089–1094. doi: https://doi.org/10.2319/100507-481.1. PMID: 18947278.
21.
EnanET, HammadSM. Microleakage under orthodontic bands cemented with nano-hydroxyapatite-modified glass ionomer. Angle Orthod, 2013; 83(6): 981–986. doi: https://doi.org/10.2319/022013-147.1. PMID: 23745977.
22.
HeraviF, BagheriH, RangraziA. Evaluation of microleakage of orthodontic bands cemented with CPP-ACP-modified glass ionomer cement. J Adv Oral Res, 2019; 10(2): 128–131.
23.
Al-BanaaLR. Evaluation of microleakage for three types of light cure orthodontic band cement. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res, 2022; 12(3): 352–357. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobcr.2022.04.004. Epub 2022Apr19. PMID: 35514676.
24.
Kola SrikanthR, DungavathN, Veera Venkata NagaS, . The electrical conductivity and dielectric properties of dental glass ionomer cements: in vitro study. J Orofac Sci, 2022; 14(1): 47–51.
25.
Al QassarS, AhmedM, Al-MallahM. Estimation of the shear bond strength and adhesive remnant index of orthodontic adhesives stored in static magnetic field. Clin Investig Orthod, 2023; 82(4): 204–211. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/27705781.2023.2265262
26.
YamatoM, KimuraT. Magnetic processing of diamagnetic materials. Polymers (Basel), 20203; 12(7): 1491. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12071491. PMID: 32635334.
27.
Profeta KrznarI, ParM, TarleZ, . Influence of the bracket material on the post-cure degree of conversion of resin-based orthodontic adhesive systems. Polymers (Basel), 2024; 16(3): 318. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16030318. PMID: 38337207.
28.
Al-HayaliS, AbedM, Al QassarS. Impact of orthodontic adhesive magnets on the mechanical properties and degree of conversion of a photopolymerized orthodontic adhesive. Ochrona przed Korozją, 2023; 66(10): 329–334.
