GLASS IONOMER CEMENTS

(BASIC MATERIAL SCIENCE)

Guided by – Dr Sushilkumar Cirigiri (HOD)

Presented by- Dr Amit Balki
PG 1st Year
 Contents
 INTRODUCTION

 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

 CLASSIFICATION

 COMPOSITION

 SETTING REACTION

 WATER BALANCE

 ADHESION

 PROPERTIES

 MANIPULATION CONSIDERATIONS

 Advantages and disadvantages

 INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATION

CONCLUSION

REFERANCES
INTRODUCTION

 Glass ionomer is the generic name of a group of materials

based on the reaction of silicate glass powder with polyacrylic
acid.
 This material acquires its name from its formulation of a glass
powder and ionomer that contains carboxylic acids.
 The term was coined by B.E.KENT
 Also referred as polyalkenoate cement
 It has always been recognised that adhesion between a
restorative material and tooth structure is a highly
 desired attribute in dentistry.

 However the oral cavity presents a hostile environment

for any chemical exchange and water is regarded as
enemy of adhesion.

 They were first described by Wilson and Kent in 1971,

and , at the time presented a natural extension to the
zinc polycarboxylate that had become available in the late
1960’s.

The advantage they provided was that phosphoric acid

was replaced by polyacrylic acid.
 The two main features that have allowed them to become
one of the accepted dental materials, are their ability to
bond to dentine and their ability to release fluoride from
the glass component of the cement.

 Thus, they combine the adhesive qualities of the zinc

polycarboxylate cements with the fluoride release of the
silicate cements.

 Until recently,the glass ionomers have been mainly used

for the restoration of erosion lesions and as a luting agent
for crown and bridge reconstruction.Their clinical
application has now been extended by the introduction of
a wide variety of new formulations which have given rise
to some interesting uses.
EARLY DEVELOPMENT:
 1966 : A.D.Wilson – examined cements prepared by mixing dental
silicate glass powder with aqueous solutions of various organic acids
(including poly(acrylic acid)
- unworkable, set slowly, sluggish, not
hydrolytically stable.

 1968,1969 : A.D.Wilson + Kent & Lewis – found that hydrolytically

stable cements could be produced by employing novel glass
formulations.
 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

 1968 : Kent – found that setting of these cements was

controlled by Al2O3/ SiO2 ratio in the glass.

 1973,1979 : Kent et al – found a glass that was high in fluoride

that gave a usable cement ASPA 1 (aluminosilicate
polycrylates).

 1972 (reported in 1976): Wilson & Crisp – key discovery – tartaric acid
– modified the cement-forming reaction, thus improving
manipulation, extending working time & greatly sharpening
setting rate.
 This refinement of ASPA I was termed ASPA II &
constituted the first practical GIC.

 1975 : Crisp et al – the disadvantage for general practice

was that its liquid tended to gel.

 1975,1977 : Crisp & Wilson – developed copolymer of

acrylic & itaconic acid that did not gel at high (50%)
concentration in aqueous solution

 ASPA IV. But this was inferior in other properties to ASPA

II
 1974 : McLean & Wilson – used it for fissure sealing & filling
 1977c : McLean & Wilson – ideal for restoration of class V
erosion lesions.

 1979 : Crisp et al – ASPA X – with excellent translucency.

 1977 : Wilson et al – ASPA IVa – fine grained version for luting.

 With less viscous polyacid, lacked the mobility of

traditional zinc phosphate cement.

 1977 : Mclean & Wilson – in a review article suggested use in

pediatric dentistry & as a liner in composite – resin / ionomer
laminate
 1973 : Wilson & Kent – reported use of poly(acrylic acid) in dry
powder form blended with glass powder.

 The cement was formed by mixing this powder with

water or tartaric acid solutions.

 1984 : Prosser et al – re-examined the above & resulted in

development of ASPA V
LATER DEVELOPMENT

 ASPA VA – A WATER-HARDENING LUTING AGENT – PROVED TO HAVE THE MIXING

QUALITIES & MOBILITY OF ZINC PHOSPHATE CEMENT

 1985 : McLean et al – the original 1977 idea of using composite

resin / ionomer laminate was revived in a modified form.

 GIC & enamel was etched – double etch technique (composite

resin was attached micromechanically to enamel & GIC bonded
indirectly to dentin

 1984 : Hunt & Knight – tunnel preparation for Class II

 The reasoning behind the technique – GIC core bonds enamel
shell together, preventing fracture (described by Hunt 1984, & Mclean
1987)
 1980 : Sced & Wilson & 1983 : Simmons – incorporated
metallic oxides & metal alloy fillers, to improve strength
of GIC.

 1985 : McLean & Gasser – fused silver particles onto

ionomer glass, giving cement radioopacity,
burnishability, smoother surface, increased wear
resistance (reported by Moore et al 1985)

 1986 : McLean – Developed new Cermet cements for

clinical use.
 1988 : Wilson & McLean – Highly viscous glass
ionomer cements

 Late 1980’s : Resin-modified glass ionomer cements

Definition of glass ionomer cement

A cement that consists of a basic glass & an acidic polymer

which sets by an acid-base reaction between these
components. (Mclean & Wilson 1994)
CLASSIFICATION

According to Skinners/ Phillips:

1. Type I – Luting
2. Type II – Restorative
Esthetic restorative
Reinforced Restorative
3.Type III – Liners and Bases

According To Mc Lean, Nicholson and Wilson (1994):

1. Glass ionomer cement
a. Glass polyalkeonates
b. Glass polyphosphonates

2. Resin modified GIC

3. Polyacid modified GIC
 According to Sturdevent:

1. Traditional or conventional

2. Metal modified GIC

a. Cermets
b. Miracle mix

3. Light cured GIC

4. Hybrid (Resin modified GIC)

5. Polyacid modified resin composite or Compomer

According to way of application:

Type - I Luting
 Type - II Restorative

a. esthetic

b. reinforced

 Type - III Liners and base

 Type - IV Pit and fissure sealant

 Type - V Used in orthodontic treatment

 Type - VI Core build up

 Type – VII High fluoride release

 Type – VIII Atraumatic Restorative treatment

 Type – IX For Pediatric

According to characteristics specified by Manufacturers:

Type I – Luting

e.g; Fuji I, Ketac cement

 Type II – Restorative

e.g; Ketac fill, Fuji II, Fuji IX

 Type III- Base & Liner

a) Weak with low acidity e.g; AC lining cement, Shofu liner

b) Strong but more acidic e.g; Ketac bond , Shofu base,

GC dental cement

c) Strong even with thin layer e.g; Witre bond

 Type IV- Admixture

e.g; Ketac silver, Miracle Mix

 COMPOSITION

The glasses for the glass ionomer cements contain three main components :

1. SILICA (SIO2)
2. ALUMINA (AL2O3)
3. CALCIUM FLUORIDE (CAF2)
Glass ionomer cement is defined as an acid-base reaction cement (Wilson
1978, Wygant 1958)

Basic component Acid component

Calcium aluminosilicate Polyelectrolyte which is a
glass containing fluoride homopolymer or copolymer of
unsaturated carboxylic acids
known scientifically as
alkenoic acids.
Chemical composition of original ionomer glass (G-200)
(Modified from Barry et al 1979)
 Powder
 SiO2 30.1%
 Al2O3 19.9%
 AlF3 2.6%
 CaF2 34.5%
 NaF 3.7%
 AlPO4 10.0%
 Fluoride
 - Decreases the melting point
- Enhance translucency of powder
- Improves consistency of mixing paste
- Increases the strength of set material
LIQUID

 Polyacrylic acid 35%

 Itaconic acid 5-15%
 Maleaic acid
 Tartaric acid
 Tricarboxylic acid
 Water 50%
 Water
- It acts as reaction medium
- Hydrates silica hydro gel and metal salts are formed
- If water is lost, cement will desiccate while setting
- It plays an important role in transporting Ca or Al ions
to react to polyacid
- It increases translucency
 Copolymers of itaconic , maleic and tricarboxylic
acid

 Tends to increase the reactivity of the liquid

 Decreases the viscosity of the liquid
 Reduces the tendency for gelation – by decreasing
intermolecular hydrogen bonding

 Tartaric acid:

 Improves handling characteristics

 Increases working time
 Serves as an accelerator by facilitating the extraction of ions
from the glass powder
EFFECT OF MOLECULAR WEIGHT AND
CONCENTRATION OF POLYACRYLIC ACID

 Increase in molecular weight and concentration

 Shortens setting time

 Increases strength
 Increased viscosity of mix
SETTING REACTION OF GLASS
IONOMER
 When the cement powder and aqueous liquid are
mixed to form a paste,the glass powder which is
basic in nature reacts with polyacrylic acid to
form,a salt hydrogel. This hydrogel is the binding
matrix.

 Water is the reaction medium and is an essential

part of the hydrogel for it is required to hydrate
the metal poly alkenoate formed.
 The setting reaction of glass Ionomer cements
involves three overlapping stages

Stage1 : Dissolution

Stage2 : Precipitation of salt, gelation and

hardening

Stage3 : Hydration of salts.

STAGES IN THE REACTION:

1. Decomposition of glass and release of cement

forming metal ions(Al 3+ and Ca 2+)
2. Migration of these ions into aqueous phase of the
cement.
3. Gelation of the polyacid by the metal ions leading
to set.
4. Post Set hardening : when metal ions become
increasingly bound to the poly acid chain. Under
conditions of high humidity ,the cement tends to
expand. The cement is vulnerable to moisture until
sufficient hardness has developed. Hardening continues
for about 24hrs , during which time translucency
develops as the chemical reaction proceeds.

5. Further slow maturation:

Even after 24 hrs,a further slow maturation takes
place and in the first few days translucency develops
further, as does the resistance to dessication and acid
attack.

Over a period of months the cement becomes more

rigid and gathers strength. Reaction is slightly
exothermic ,reflected in a setting shrinkage.
 Setting reaction of auto cure cements

Only the surface of each particle is

atacked by the acid
Releasing Ca & Al ions, & F ions
which remain free & are not part of
the matrix
The calcium polyacrylate chains form
first then the aluminium polyacrylate
chains follow immediately

By stage 3, there is a degree of

maturity, with more calcium &
aluminium chains
Also a halo of siliceous hydrogel
surrounding each glass particle, which
increases resistance to acid attack
Note : these chains can break & reform
throughout the life of the restoration
Factors affecting setting reaction

Depends on manufacturer :
 Glass composition,
 Glass fusion temperature,
 Powder particle size,
 Tartaric acid concentration.
Depends on operator :
 Temperature of mixing slab
 Water powder ratio
FACTORS AFFECTING SETTING CHARACTERISTICS

 Role of fluoride
 Role of tartaric acid

Role of fluoride

Fluoride forms metal complexes

They retard the binding of cation to Release of H+

anion sites on polyacrylate chain
Acidity of paste increases
Delays gelation & prolongs working
time Delays pH dependant gelation
 Role of tartaric acid

• Tartaric acid is stronger than polyacrylic acid

Forms stronger complex with Al
Therefore increases extraction of Al from glass

• Initially tartaric acid alone complexes cations

As neutalisation proceeds & pH ~ 3
Polyacrylic acid becomes neutralised by metal ions until cement sets at pH ~ 5-5.5

• Also ionization of polyacrylic acid is suppressed & unwinding of the

chain is retarded, resulting in decrease in viscosity & delaying gelation

• Once gelation occurs, tartaric acid accelerates hardening

• Tartaric acid & calcium react preferentially therefore initial set may be due to
formation of calcium tartarate

• Tartaric acid controls initial setting of cement

FACTORS AFFECTING RATE OF SETTING
1. Glass composition : increase in Al/Si ratio – faster set

2. Particle size : finer – faster set

3. Tartaric acid – sharpens set without shortening working

time

1. Relative proportion of constituents – Powder : Liquid

2. Temperature of mixing – increase – faster set

 FACTORS WITHIN THE PROVINCE OF THE
CLINICIAN

1. Temperature of mixing

 Chilling powder & mixing pad – increases working time up to

25% (Mc Lean 1970)
 Increase in working time occurs without loss of physical
properties (Makinson 1978)
 Word of warning –
 Chilling of liquid will cause gelation
 Increase in humidity & temperature below dew point –
weakens the cement
 2. Powder : Liquid

 Increase in powder – faster set

 But insufficient liquid – decrease in translucency of the set cement
PROPERTIES
Physical Properties
PROPERTY TYPE I TYPE II TYPE III

P:L ratio 1.5:1 3:1 3:1

Working time 3.5 2.0 2.0
Setting time 7.0 5.0 4.0
Compressive 120 150-200 120
strength(Mpa)
Tensile 9-12 15-20 6-10
strength(Mpa)
Flexural 12-15 18-20 13-16
strength
Surface 160 200 120
hardness
 Film 20 - -
thickness(uM)
Coeff.thermal -
expansion 13x10-6 8x10-6
Solubility 0.1 0.1 0.1
Biological Properties
Freshly mixed GIC – Ph 0.9 – 1.6 – mild inflammatory
response to pulp tissue
With time ph increases but it does not induce secondary
dentine formation
Inflammatory response : Silicate cement > Zinc
Phosphate > GIC > ZOE cement
Phosphates mixes with saliva and along with Calcium
maintain mineral content of tooth
Ion rich layer – resistant to acid attack – prevent
secondary caries
Asthetics

Tooth colored material

Less esthetic compared to silicate cement and composites

Lacks required translucency and rough surface

Discoloration and staining – hydrophilic monomer

incomplete polymerization
 Thermal Properties

The Thermal diffusivity value of glass Ionomer cement ions is close to that for
dentin, adequate thermal insulating effect on the pulp , protects it from thermal
trauma

CLINICAL MANIPULATION
Glass ionomers are available commercially in two forms:

 Powder and liquid supplied separately, or hand mixing.

 Encapsulated or mechanical mixing.

PREPARATION OF THE TOOTH
SURFACE

 Smear layer block off the tooth surface, so should be removed to achieve
adhesive bonding.

 This is achieved by:

i) Pumice wash
ii) 10% Polyacrylic acid for 10 sec
iii) 50% Citric acid for 5 sec
iv) 25% Tannic acid for 30 sec
v) 2% Ferric chloride
 ADHESION

It is the most important property of glass ionomer cement that allows a

conservative approach to restoration.

It has particular advantage in restoring:

 Cervical erosion lesion
 Sealing pit and fissures

Adhesion to dentin and enamel enables it to provide a perfect seal.

Glass ionomer cements are the only restorative materials that depend
primarily on chemical bond to tooth structure.
BARRIERS TO ADHESION :

WATER –

In oral fluids,organic adhesion are either insufficiently polar to compete

with water for surface of dentinal tissue or if highly polar , the bond
they form is hydrolytically unstable.

Hydrophilic, highly ionic GIC competes successfully with water because

of its multiplicity of carboxyl groups that form H bonds with the
substrate
MECHANISM OF
ADHESION

Polyalkenoic acid attacks the dentine & enamel and displaces

phosphate and calcium (or strontium) ions.

These migrate into the cement and develop an ion enriched

layer firmly attached to the tooth structure.

Dentinal tubules will remain sealed and microleakage can only

occur into the cement.
MECHANISM OF ADHESION TO
ENAMEL & DENTIN
 Smith (1968): Chelation of calcium contained in apatite –
 involved in adhesion

 Beech (1973): Suggested interaction of polyacrylic acid & apatite.

 Bonding only to apatite, therefore weaker adhesion of GIC

 to dentine and non existence of adhesion to decalcified
 dentine.

 Wilson (1974): Considered possibility of polyacrylates bonding to

 collagen.
McLean & Wilson (1977): Hypothesized presence of an
intermediate later between cement 7 tooth surface.

Wilson, Prosser & Powis (1983): Postulated the adsorption

phenomenon of bond to mineralized tissue.
PREPARATION OF THE TOOTH
SURFACE
 Smear layer block off the tooth surface, so should
be removed to achieve adhesive bonding.

 This is achieved by:

i) Pumice wash
ii) 10% Polyacrylic acid for 10 sec
iii) 50% Citric acid for 5 sec
iv) 25% Tannic acid for 30 sec
v) 2% Ferric chloride
Hand dispensing

Full spoon, no excess

Tip liquid bottle to side,

then invert completely
If water / tartaric acid, only
1 drop used.
HAND MIXING
CORRECT CONSISTENCY FOR HAND
MIXED

Type I : Luting : String up to 3-4cm

from slab

Type II : String 1cm + gloss

Type III :For lining amalgam : 1.5:1

P/L ratio : 3-4cm string
For base for composite : 3:1
P/L ratio : 1-1.5cm string
MECHANICAL MIXING

Advantages
 Better properties due to controlled P\L ratio
 Less mixing time is required
 Convenient delivery system

 Disadvantages
 Restricted amount of cement as per
manufacturers choice
 Number of shades provided are limiting
 Colors can not be blended
The resultant mix should be shiny in appearance

Dull mix is not suitable for use

PROTECTION OF CEMENT
DURING SETTING
The glass ionomer cement undergoing setting reaction is very
sensitive to water

Immediately after placement preshaped matrix band is applied to

protect cement from environment during initial set

- It also provide maximum contour so that minimum finishing is required

The matrix is removed after five minutes and cement is immediately

coated with special varnish provided by manufacturer
FINISHING

Excess material is trimmed from the margins.

Hand instruments are preferred to rotary tools to

avoid ditching.

Further finishing if required is done after 24 hours. .

Failure to protect the cement surface, results in a

chalky or crazed surface.
 INDICATIONS

1 RESTORATIVE GIC

EROSION / ABRASION LESIONS

CLASS V CARIOUS LESIONS

CLASS III CARIES

MINIMAL CAVITY PREPARATIONS

 Primary Teeth restorations
 Primary Teeth restorations

 Pits and fissures

2 LUTING GIC
 Bracket Bonding
 GLASS IONOMER AS LINER AND BASE

 Glass-ionomer cement GIC as bases

as a Lining
 CONTRAINDICATION

Class IV carious lesions of fractured Incisors.

 Lesions involving large areas of labial enamel where

esthetics is of major importance

 Class II carious lesions where conventional cavities

are prepared; replacement of existing amalgam
restorations.

 Lost cusp areas.

GIC IN ENDODONTIC

 Root canal sealing

 Retrograde root canal filling

 Perforation repair

 Treatment of vertical fractures

 Coronal sealing after root canal treatment

ADVANTAGES

 Adhesive & esthetic restorative material

 Liberate fluoride –anti cariogenic

 Biocompatible

 Low oral solubility

 Easy mixing

 Increase strength and stiffness

DISADVANTAGES

White and crazed surface

Clinically poor esthetic –opaque

Initial slow setting

Highly technique sensitive, moisture sensitive

Poor abrasion resistance

 REFERENCES

1. Glass-ionomer cement : Alan D. Wilson / John W.

Mclean
2. An atlas of Glass Ionomer Cements – A Clinician’s
guide (3rd edition) : Graham J. Mount
3. Preservation & restoration of tooth structure : Graham
J. Mount
4. Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials (11th edition) :
Kenneth J. Anusavice
5. Sturdevant’s Art & Sience of Operative Dentistry (4 th
edition):Theodore M. Roberson et al