Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Category: Restorative Created: Wednesday, 01 February 2017 05:00 Written by Mark L. Pitel, DMD Print
INTRODUCTION
Glass ionomer cements (GICs) were first introduced in the 1970s.1 Currently, they are utilized extensively for
cores; bases and liners; and the cementation of posts, crowns, and fixed bridges. Even though they have
numerous clinical advantages, the early generations of GICs were thought to be too rough or opaque for anterior
restorations and not durable enough for posterior restorations. However, GICs have been greatly improved since
they were first introduced. Many of those earlier concerns have now been fully addressed by manufacturers.
Though composite resins are usually the first choice for most direct aesthetic restorations, certain features of
GICs may make them a better choice in selected uses.
CASE REPORTS
Case 1: The 70-Month Recall, Stress-Bearing Class I/Class V GIC Restorations
The first case (Figures 1 to 6) represents the pretreatment, immediate postoperative views, and the 70-month
clinical recall photos of the 2 direct GIC restorations.
CASE 1
http://www.dentistrytoday.com/articles/114-articlesmagazine/Restorative/10266-an-improved-glass-ionomer-restorative-system-stress-bearing-class-i-a… 2/7
1/27/2018 An Improved Glass Ionomer Restorative System: Stress-Bearing Class I and II Indications | Dentistry Today
Figure 5. The 70-month postoperative recall Figure 6. The 70-month recall of the Class V
of the Class I restoration seen in Figure 3. The restoration seen in Figure 4. This restoration is
restoration shows almost no detectable also in excellent clinical condition.
changes and would be rated alpha according to
the US Public Health Service criteria.
The patient, a 58-year-old male, presented for routine replacement of a defective Class I amalgam in tooth No.
30 (mandibular right first molar). Although the Class V amalgam in the same tooth was still serviceable, the
patient elected to simultaneously replace it as well. This patient had a history of being very apprehensive and
frequently reported postoperative sensitivity following treatment previously. We chose to utilize GIC rather than
composite resin because it could be placed very rapidly with a true bulk-fill technique and would be very
unlikely to cause postoperative sensitivity.
A Type II, posterior-grade, GIC material suitable for stress-bearing Class I restorations was selected for use
(EQUIA Fil). Following clinical placement, the restoration was treated with a nanofilled light-cured resin
surface coating (EQUIA Coat). Further details about this case and the restorative technique for placing the 2
restorations can be reviewed in a clinical case report by the author, published in 2010.8 The 2 restorations were
followed carefully during 6-plus years and documented periodically. Figures 3 and 4 were taken immediately
after clinical placement; Figures 5 and 6 were taken at the 70-month recall. Clinically, they show very little signs
of wear, no marginal staining or recurrent decay, and the patient reported no post-restorative sensitivity at any
time. Both would be rated alpha according to the USPHS criteria. Although the manufacturer does state that the
light-cured resin coating can be reapplied if needed, we did not feel that it was clinically necessary, so it was not
done.
and a high incidence of recurrent decay. She presented for replacement of a failing composite restoration in tooth
No. 4, the maxillary right second premolar. The old MOD filling was removed and decay excavated. To decrease
the likelihood of further recurrent decay, we elected to re-restore the cavity with a GIC restoration instead of
composite resin. Because this was a moderately sized, stress-bearing Class II cavity, it required a posterior-grade
GIC. EQUIA Forte was chosen because of the excellent clinical performance that the author has experienced
with the first generation of EQUIA. In addition, it was chosen because it is now specifically rated for
unrestricted use in stress-bearing Class I and Class II cavities. Figure 7 shows the pretreatment condition of the
tooth, and Figure 8 the finished cavity preparation that was completed using rubber dam isolation. The
restorative material in the case was applied directly into the cavity using a true bulk-fill technique like dental
amalgam. As with any bulk-fill material, a correct matrix application is a critical step. Following a similar
protocol to what is used for direct composite, precontoured sectional matrix bands (Palodent Plus [Dentsply
Sirona Restorative]), spring retaining rings (Triodent V3 Ring [Ultradent Products]), and plastic wedges were
placed onto the mesial and distal proximal surfaces.
CASE 2
Figure 7. Pretreatment condition of a stress- Figure 8. Class II MOD cavity after removal
bearing, Class II, MOD composite filling with of old composite restoration and excavation of
recurrent decay. caries. It was completed under rubber dam.
Figure 9. Sectional matrices, wedges, and Figure 10. The 20% polyacrylic acid
spring retainers were placed and the matrices conditioner was applied to cavity for 10
burnished well to proximal surfaces. seconds to clean smear layer from intaglio and
margins.
http://www.dentistrytoday.com/articles/114-articlesmagazine/Restorative/10266-an-improved-glass-ionomer-restorative-system-stress-bearing-class-i-a… 4/7
1/27/2018 An Improved Glass Ionomer Restorative System: Stress-Bearing Class I and II Indications | Dentistry Today
Figure 11. The updated version of GIC Figure 12. After waiting 2.5 minutes, the
(EQUIA Forte Fil [GC America]) is expressed restoration was contoured and equilibrated
directly into the cavity using a bulk-fill using diamond and carbide burs (Brasseler
technique. USA).
Figure 13. A nanofilled light-cured resin Figure 14. Completed GIC restoration was
coating (EQUIA Forte Coat [GC America]) rechecked with articulating paper and flossed
was applied to the occlusal surface and to ensure that the resin coating had not altered
margins and cured for 20 seconds. contacts or occlusion.
After all of the matrix components were placed, a composite instrument was used to burnish the matrix to the
adjacent tooth surfaces (Figure 9). The cavity was then treated with a 20% polyacrylic acid solution for 10
seconds (GC CAVITY CONDITIONER [GC America]) and thoroughly rinsed (Figure 10). This step is used to
clean the cavity and remove the smear layer; it does not etch the tooth or otherwise damage either the enamel or
dentin surfaces. An appropriate shade of GIC (EQUIA Forte Fil) was selected. The unit-dose cartridge was
activated and mixed according the manufacturer’s directions for 10 seconds in a triturator/mixer. It was then
inserted into the applicator instrument and expressed directly into the prepared cavity, slightly overfilling it
(Figure 11). Viscosity develops quite rapidly with this GIC material, so it should be placed into the cavity within
10 seconds of mixing. The final set time for this material is 2.5 minutes. During this time interval, the setting
GIC should be protected from moisture contamination or excessive drying. An optional coating with EQUIA
Forte Coat can be applied to the setting material to ensure against contamination. The set GIC restoration was
then contoured with fine diamonds (Brasseler USA 8369DF.31.025 FG Fine Football Dialite Diamond) and
carbide burs (Brasseler USA LGI H48L.31.010 FG Long Flame Sterile Carbide) and the occlusion equilibrated
(Figure 12).
Finally, the surface of the contoured restoration was treated with a thin coating of a nanofilled light-cured resin
(EQUIA Forte Coat) and light-cured for 20 seconds (Figure 13). If desired, this same resin can be applied to the
proximal surfaces with dental floss. The manufacturer recommends against air-thinning the resin coating to
avoid over-thinning and to reduce the chance for any air inhibition during setting. After the resin coating had set,
and before dismissing the patient, the occlusion was checked again and the contacts were flossed. The final
restoration is shown in Figure 14, demonstrating excellent contacts, contour, and aesthetics.
http://www.dentistrytoday.com/articles/114-articlesmagazine/Restorative/10266-an-improved-glass-ionomer-restorative-system-stress-bearing-class-i-a… 5/7
1/27/2018 An Improved Glass Ionomer Restorative System: Stress-Bearing Class I and II Indications | Dentistry Today
CASE 3
Figure 15. Pretreatment view of a failing Figure 16. Although not absolutely necessary
Class I stress-bearing composite filling on the with GIC restorations, a rubber dam helps
mandibular first molar. facilitate the restorative procedure.
Figure 17. The old restoration was removed Figure 18. A stress-bearing distal occlusal
and new distal decay excavated. The darker Class II GIC restoration (EQUIA Forte Fil)
area seen on pulpal floor was sclerotic dentin. was placed (as in case 2). After application of
resin coating (EQUIA Forte Coat), the final
result is shown here.
Following placement of anesthesia, a rubber dam (Ivory Rubber Dam [Heraeus Kulzer]) was placed (Figure 16).
The old restoration was removed and the new distal decay excavated. The darker spot seen on the pulpal floor
(Figure 17) was sclerotic dentin, not active decay. A matrix band, retaining ring, and wedge were placed in a
similar manner to that in case 2. The prepared cavity was treated with 20% polyacrylic acid for 10 seconds, then
thoroughly rinsed. An appropriate shade of GIC (EQUIA Forte Fil) was mixed and placed directly into the
cavity once again with a bulk-fill technique, overfilling it slightly. The GIC material was allowed to set
undisturbed for 2.5 minutes. It was then contoured and equilibrated using fine diamond burs. The final step was
a thin coat of the light-cured nanofilled resin (EQUIA Forte Coat). This was light-cured with an LED curing
light (G-Light LED Curing light [GC America]) for 20 seconds. The occlusion and contacts were rechecked
before dismissing the patient to ensure that the nanofilled resin layer did not alter either. The final restoration
(Figure 18) demonstrated excellent marginal adaptation, a good distal contact, and acceptable aesthetics for a
posterior tooth-colored restoration.
http://www.dentistrytoday.com/articles/114-articlesmagazine/Restorative/10266-an-improved-glass-ionomer-restorative-system-stress-bearing-class-i-a… 6/7
1/27/2018 An Improved Glass Ionomer Restorative System: Stress-Bearing Class I and II Indications | Dentistry Today
CLOSING COMMENTS
The 3 case reports presented herein demonstrate the clinical advantages of a new restorative system combining a
high viscosity GIC with a light-cured resin surface coating. Recent improvements to this system now make it
suitable for stress-bearing Class I and II cavities. When used with a bulk-fill technique, this GIC system
compares favorably with dental amalgam. The cases reveal that the aesthetic potential for this new GIC
restorative system is similar to direct posterior composite. For anterior restorations that have very high aesthetic
demands, composite resins may still be the material of choice, but using a system of GIC coated with a
nanofilled resin glaze certainly makes them aesthetically suitable for many Class V, Class III, and interim
anterior restorations.9
References
1. Wilson AD, Kent BE. A new translucent cement for dentistry. The glass ionomer cement. Br Dent J.
1972;132:133-135.
2. Davidson C. Advances in glass-ionomer cements. J Appl Oral Sci. 2006;14(suppl):3-9.
3. Pashley DH, Tay FR, Yiu C, et al. Collagen degradation by host-derived enzymes during aging. J Dent Res.
2004;83:216-221.
4. Visse R, Nagase H. Matrix metalloproteinases and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases: structure, function,
and biochemistry. Circ Res. 2003;92:827-839.
5. Mount GJ. An Atlas of Glass-Ionomer Cements: A Clinician’s Guide. 3rd ed. London, England: Martin
Dunitz; 2001:38.
6. Diem VT, Tyas MJ, Ngo HC, et al. The effect of a nano-filled resin coating on the 3-year clinical performance
of a conventional high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18:753-759.
7. Basso M, Brambilla E, Benites MG, et al. Glass ionomer cement for permanent dental restorations: a 48-
months, multi-centre, prospective clinical trial. Stomatology Edu Journal. 2015;2:25-35.
8. Pitel ML. A rapid and aesthetic alternative to a direct posterior composite. Dent Today. 2010;29:148-151.
9. Pitel ML. Reconsidering glass-ionomer cements for direct restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent.
2014;35:26-31.
Dr. Pitel is currently an associate clinical professor of operative dentistry at Columbia University College of
Dental Medicine and maintains a private practice in Poughkeepsie, NY. He can be reached at (845) 454-0790 or
via email at mlp@drmarkpitel.com.
Related Articles
http://www.dentistrytoday.com/articles/114-articlesmagazine/Restorative/10266-an-improved-glass-ionomer-restorative-system-stress-bearing-class-i-a… 7/7