The impact of glass ionomer cement and composite resin on microscale pH in cariogenic biofilms and demineralization of dental tissues

Objective. Secondary caries is among the most frequent reasons for the failure of dental restorations. Glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorations have been proposed to protect the surrounding dental tissues from demineralization through the release of fluoride and by buffering the acid attack from dental biofilms. In contrast, the lack of buffering by composite resin (CR) restorations has been suggested as a promoting factor for the development of secondary caries. Methods. The present study employed transversal microradiography and confocal microscopy based pH ratiometry to quantify mineral loss and map microscale pH gradients inside Streptococcus mutans biofilms grown on compound specimens consisting of enamel, dentin and either GIC or CR. Results. Mineral loss in dentin was significantly lower next to GIC than next to CR, but no significant differences in local biofilm pH were observed between the two restorative materials. Significance. The cariostatic effect of GIC relies predominantly on the provision of fluoride and not on a direct buffering action. The lack of buffering by CR did not affect local biofilm pH and may therefore be of minor importance for secondary caries development. (c) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of The Academy of Dental Materials. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Automated summary

The study showed that Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC) restorations performed better in reducing dentin mineral loss compared to Composite Resin (CR) restorations. The cariostatic effect of GIC mainly relies on fluoride release rather than a direct buffering action, while the lack of buffering by CR did not significantly affect local biofilm pH, indicating a minor role in the development of secondary caries.