The document provides an overview of glass ionomer cement (GIC), including its history, composition, properties, applications, and advances. It discusses how GIC sets via an acid-base reaction between glass powder and polyacrylic acid liquid. Key points include that GIC bonds chemically to tooth structure, has coefficient of thermal expansion similar to tooth, and provides long-term fluoride release for remineralization. The document also reviews classifications of GIC, advantages like adhesion and fluoride release, and limitations like moisture sensitivity. Finally, it discusses newer GIC formulations like resin-modified, metal-reinforced, and polyacid-modified GICs that aim to improve properties.

1. Presented by :
Dr Ashwan S. Uke (Ist MDS)
JMF’s ACPM Dental College, Dhule

2. • INTRODUCTION
• HISTORY AND EVOLUTION
• CLASSIFICATION
• COMPOSITION
• SETTING REACTION
• MECHANISM OF ADHESION
• FLUORIDE RELEASE
• PROPERTIES OF GIC
CONTENTS
• INDICATIONS
• CONTRAINDICATIONS
• ADVANTAGES
• DISADVANTAGES
• MANIPULATION
• SANDWICH TECHNIQUE
• ADVANCES IN GIC
• CONCLUSION

3. INTRODUCTION
DEFINITIONS:
GLASS
It is defined as a hard, stiff, amorphous material made by fusing silicates with
one or more types of metal oxides, usually an alkali or alkaline earth oxide, boron
oxide, or alumina.
• CEMENT
It is defined as substance that hardens from a viscous state to a solid state to
join two surfaces; for dental applications, cements act as a base, liner, filling
material, or adhesive to bind devices and prostheses to tooth structures or to each
other.

4. • GLASS INOMER CEMENT:
It is defined as a cement that hardens following an acid-base reaction
between fluoroaluminosilicate glass powder and an aqueous-based polyacrylic
acid solution.
-Philips Science
of Dental Materials, 12th edition
“Glass ionomer cement is a basic glass and an acidic polymer which sets by an
acid- base reaction between these components”
-JW MCLEAN, LW NICHOLSON, AD
WILSON

5. Aluminosilicate
glass particles
The ion cross linked
polymer
• Polyalkenoate
cement
• Dentin substitute
• Man made dentin
• Artificial dentin
• ASPA

6. GLASS IONOMER CEMENT
• ADA Specification number = 96
• Acid-base reaction cement.
Calcium aluminosilicate
glass containing Fluoride.
Unsaturated carboxylic acids
known scientifically as
Alkenoic acids.
BASIC ACIDIC
BASIC ACIDIC

7. Scientific development:-
 D.C. smith in 1968 used poly acrylic acid in zinc polycarboxylate
cement.
 The invention of glass ionomer cement was done in 1969. first
reported by Wilson and Kent in 1971.( ASPA I).
 First practical material: ASPA II in1972 by Crisp and Wilson.
 First marketable material, ASPA IV in 1973.
 Luting agent ASPA IV a in 1975.

8.  Metal reinforced cements in 1977 by Sced and Wilson.
 Cermet ionomer cements in 1978 by Mc Lean and Glasser.
 Improved translucency, ASPA X by Crisp, Abel, Wilson in 1979.
 Water activated cements, ASPA V in 1982 by Prosser et al.

9. Clinical development:-
 First clinical trials in 1970 by Mc Lean.
 Class I restorations, fissure sealing and preventive dentistry in 1974 by Mc
Lean and Wilson.
 Erosion lesions, deciduous teeth, lining, luting, composite/ ionomer
laminates in 1977 by J. W. Mclean & A. D. Wilson.

10.  Improved clinical techniques between 1976-77 by G.J. Mount &
Makinson,1978.
 Approximal lesions and minimal cavity preparation in 1980 by Mc Lean.
 Water activated luting cements in 1984 by Mc Lean et al.
 Tunnel class I and II preparations by Hunt and Knight in 1984.
 Double etch ionomer /composite resin laminates,1985,Mc Lean.

11. 1)According to skinners
 Type I – Luting
 Type II- Restorative
 Type III- Liner and base
2)According To Mc Lean, Nicholson and Wilson (1994)
 Glass ionomer cement
a. Glass polyalkeonates
b. Glass polyphosphonates
 Resin modified GIC
 Polyacid modified GIC

12. 3) According to application
 Type I Luting cements
 Type II Restorative cements
 Type III Lining cements
 Type IV Fissure sealants
 Type V Orthodontic cements
 Type VI Core build up cements
 Type VII High Fluoride Release Command set
 Type VIII for ART
 Type IX For Pediatric

13. 1.Glass ionomer cements
a. (i) Glass polyalkeonates
(ii) Glass polyphosphonates
b. Resin modified GIC
c. Polyacid modified composite resin
2.a. Auto-cure
b. Dual cure
c. Tri cure
3.a. Type I – Luting
b. Type II - Restorative
Type II. 1. Restorative aesthetic
Type II. 2. Restorative reinforced
c. Type III- Lining or Base
F) According to GJ
Mount

14. 4) NEWER CLASSIFICATION
 Traditional glass-ionomer
• Type I - Luting Cement.
• Type II - Restorative Cements.
• Type III - Liners & Bases.
 Metal Modified glass-ionomer
• Miracle Mix
• Cermet Cement.

15.  Light Cure glass-ionomer
HEMA added to liquid.
 Hybrid glass-ionomer/Resin modified glass ionomer
• Composite resin in which fillers are substituted with glass- ionomer particles.
• Pre-cured glasses blended into composites.

18. ROLE OF WATER
1) Reaction medium.
2) hydrates the siliceous hydrogel
and the metal salts formed .
3) As a plasticizer.
• Water content in set cement: 11-24%
• A) LOOSELY BOUND WATER
B) TIGHTLY BOUND WATER
• Most susceptible to moisture contamination during Stage 2 of
the setting process before the calcium/strontium ions have
been locked into the resistant gel matrix.
• Susceptible to water loss for some time even after placement.
FUNCTIONS

19. BALANCE OF
WATER
LOSS OF WATER
(1) Shrinking and crazing
(2) Retardation of cement
formation
(3) Weaker cement
ABSORPTION OF WATER
(1) Disruption of surface by swelling
(2) Loss of substance to oral
environment

21. Glass + H+
↓
Ca2+ + Na+ + F−
↓
Al3+ + SiO4−
CH COOH
CH2
(ACRYLIC ACID
UNIT)

22. Silica gel
Na+ ions
Orthosilicic
acid

26. A) Bond to mineralized tissue
B) Bond to collagen

28.  It is likely that a further release is available from the glass particles
themselves because the glass can be regarded as being porous to ions such
as these.
 The large release of fluoride ions during the first few days after placement
declines rapidly during the first week and stabilizes by the end of two to
three months.
 There is evidence to indicate a continuing release for at least seven years
after placement of a restoration and, almost certainly, longer.

29.  It is suggested that, for the fluoride concentration to be
effective in initiating re‐ mineralization, the
concentration in saliva should be at least 10
parts/million.
 It is this level which is available from glass‐ionomer
materials and any concentration below this level will be
of little or no clinical significance.

31. (Fluoride release over time from
an average glass-ionomer restoration)
(Fluoride release from Traditional GIC vs
Compomer)

32.  Fluoride release exponentially declines to low levels (0.5-2.0 ppm typically)
 Re-charging Fluoride absorption from other sources into GIC materials for re-release
later
 Re-charging -- occurs when F can readily diffuse from high-to-low concentrations.
 Re-charging strategies:-
Use daily fluoride rinses to provide F source for re- charging
Use F toothpastes for re-charging
Use topical fluorides for re-charging

33. CEMENT TYPE 14 DAYS 30 DAYS
CERMET 200 µg 300 µg
SILVER ALLOY ADMIX 3350 µg 4040 µg
TYPE I GIC 470 µg 700 µg
TYPE II GIC 440 µg 650 µg
GIC LINER [conventional] 1000 µg 1300 µg
GIC LINER [Light cure] 1200 µg 1600 µg

34. PHYSICAL AND MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

35. CO-EFFICIENT OF THERMAL EXPANSION
ENAMEL: 11.4 × 10−6/°C
DENTIN : 8.3 × 10−6/°C
GIC: 10–11 ×10−6/°C.
THERMAL DIFFUSIVITY Type of Material Thermal Diffusivity
(× 10−6 mm2/sec)
Enamel 0.47
Dentin 0.18
Water 0.14
Type I GIC (luting) 0.15
Type II GIC (restorative) 0.19
Type III GIC (base and liner) 0.35
The Thermal diffusivity of GIC is
close to that of dentin, i.e it protects the
pulp from thermal trauma

36. SOLUBILITY & DISINTEGRATION
• Clinically, GIC < Zinc Polycarboxylate < Zinc Phosphate.
• In water, Resin < GIC < Silicate cement.
• Acidulated fluoride phosphate applications can damage glass‐ionomer
• Severe impairment of salivary flow will damage glass‐ionomer.
DIMENSIONAL CHANGES
• Autocure GIC, show a volumetric contraction of 3%.
• RMGIC also show shrinkage which is counteracted due to the
hydrophilic nature of the resin component.

37. ANTIBACTERIAL ACTIVITY
1) They are effective against S.mutans , S.sobrinus, L.acidophillus and A. viscosus.
The best activity is shown by Vitremer (RMGIC ).
(Oper Dent 2005;30-5,636-640 )
2) GICs containing CHX are effective in inhibiting bacteria associated with caries, and
incorporation of 1% CHX diacetate has been reported.
(Dental Materials, 2006 Volume 22,
Issue 7,Pages 64-652)

38. 1. Restoration of permanent teeth
• Class V and Class III cavities
• Abrasion and erosion lesions
• Root caries
2. Restoration of deciduous teeth
• Class I- IV cavities
• Rampant caries, nursing bottle caries

39. 3. Luting or cementing
• Metal restorations (inlays, onlays &
crowns)
• Veneers
• Pins and Posts
• Orthodontic bands and brackets

40. 4. Preventive restorations
• Tunnel preparation
• Pit and fissure sealant
5. Protective liner under composite and amalgam
6. Dentin substitute
7. Core build up
8. Splinting of periodontally weakened
teeth

41. 9. Other restorative techniques
a) Sandwich technique
b) Atraumatic restorative treatment
(Fuji VIII and Fuji IX)
10. In Endodontics
• Repair of external root resorption
• Repair of perforation
• Retrograde filling

42. 1) Class IV carious lesions (or) fractured incisors
2) Lesions involving large areas of labial enamel where
esthetics is of major importance.
3) Class II carious lesion where conventional cavities are
prepared, for replacement of existing amalgam restorations.
4) Lost cusp areas.

44. Correct consistency of hand mixed cement:-
Luting:- powder/liquid ratio is about 1.5:1
 It should string up approximately 3-4 cm from the slab.
Restorative cement:- powder/liquid ratio is about 3:1
 It should string up approximately 1 cm from the slab and retain a glossy
surface.
Lining:-powder/liquid ratio is approximately about 1.5:1
 It should string up approximately 4-5 cm from the slab.

48.  Initial finishing and contouring - By sharp instruments such as Bard parker handle
with blades, gold foil knifes, diamond points in high speed.
 Final polishing after 24 hours.
 Final finishing- soflex discs and abrasive strips.

49.  Resins such as enamel bonding agents afford the best surface
protection to the cement.
 It fills the irregularities on the surface and gives a smooth finish
for a longer period compared to varnish, petroleum jelly.
 Resins are more impermeable compared to even varnish.

50.  After cavity preparation, condition the cavity to develop
good adhesion with GIC.
 Place Type III GIC into prepared cavity.
 After setting, etch the enamel with orthophosphoric acid
for 15 seconds.
 This will improve micromechanical bond to composite
resin.
 Apply a thin layer of low viscosity enamel bonding agent &
finally place the composite resin over GIC & light cure it.

51. In the open technique, the GIC is
used to replace the dentin and also
fill the cervical part of the box,
which results in a part of the GI
being exposed to the oral
environment. Use the “open
sandwich” technique when there is
no remaining enamel at the
gingival margin.
In the closed technique, the dentin
is covered by the GIC, which is in
turn completely covered by the
overlaying composite. Use the
“closed sandwich” technique when
there is remaining enamel at the
gingival margin.

52. • Developed by Sced and Wilson in 1980.
• Metallic fillers have been incorporated in GIC’S to
improve their fracture and stress bearing capacity.

53. TYPES :-
1. Silver alloy admixed Spherical amalgam alloy powder is mixed with
restorative type GIC powder (Miracle Mix).
2. Cermet Silver particles are bonded to glass particles. This is done by sintering
a mixture of the two powders at a high temperature (Ketac-Silver).

54.  LOW VISCOSITY GIC
Also called as FlowableGIC
Low P:L ratio thus increase flow.
 INDICATIONS
1) for lining
2) pit and fissure sealer
3) endodontic sealer
4) for sealing hypersensitive cervicalarea

55.  Developed as an alternative to amalgam.
 Packable / condensable glass ionomer.
 COMPOSITION:-
Powder :-Ca, Al fluorosilicate glass
Liquid :-Poly acrylic acid, Tartaric acid, water and benzoic
acid

56. DISADVANTAGES:
• Limited life
• Moderately polishable
• Not esthetic
ADVANTAGES :
• Packable or condensable
• Improved wear resistance
• Low solubility
• Rapid finishing possible
• Decrease moisture
sensitivity
INDICATIONS:
•Restoration of primary
molar teeth
•Intermediate restoration
•Core build up material
•For A RT

57.  These materials were developed to overcome some of the
drawbacks of conventional GIC like –
1. Moisture sensitivity
2. Low initial strength
3. Fixed working times.
 RMGIC can be defined as hybrid cement that sets via an acid
base reaction and partly via a photochemical polymerization
reaction.
 Eg. Fuji II light cure, Vitrebond, Photac- Fil, Vitremer, Fuji V.

58. 1.Compomers
2.Condensable self-hardening
GIC
3.Fibre reinforced GIC
4.Giomers
5.Amalgomers
6.Chlorhexidine impregnated GIC
7.Proline containing GIC
8.CPP-ACP containing GIC
9.Zirconia containing GIC
10.Nano bioceramic modified GIC
11.Calcium aluminate GIC
12.Hainomers
13.Low Ph smart material

59. • Resin-based composite consisting of a silicate glass
filler phase and a methacrylate based matrix with
carboxylic acid functional groups; also known as
polyacid-modified glass ionomer cement, a term
derived from composite and ionomer; a secondary
setting mechanism is related to acid-base
reactions of the glass filler.
• Its fracture toughness, flexural strength and wear
resistance are better than GIC but less than
composite

60. USES
1) Pit and fissure sealant
2) Restoration of primary teeth
3) Liners and bases
4) Core build up material
5) For class III & V lesions
6) Cervical erosion / abrasion
7) Repair of defective margins in restorations
8) Sealing of root surfaces for over dentures
9) Reterograde filling material

61. CONTRAINDICATIONS-
1) Class IV carious lesions
2) Class II cavities where
conventional cavity is prepared
3) Lost cusp areas
4) Under full crown or PFM
crowns
ADVANTAGES-
1) Easy to use
2) Easy adaptation to the tooth
3) Good aesthetics
4) More working time than RM GIC

62.  They contain monomers and chemical initiators such as the benzoyl peroxide and
t-amines to allow self polymerization.
 E.g. Ketac MolarAplicap, GC Fuji IX Capsule
ADVANTAGES OVER CONVENTIONALGIC’S
1) Packable and condensable
2) Easy placement
3) Non sticky
4) Rapid finishing can be done
5) Improved wear resistance
6) Solubility in oral fluids is very low

63. USES
1) Mainly used in pediatric dentistry for – Cementation of crown
Space maintainers
Bands and brackets
2) Final restorative material in primary teeth
3) For sealing of hypersensitive cervical areas
4) Sandwich restorations
5) Fissure sealing material
Geriatric restorative material for class I ,II III&IV cavities and cervical
erosions

64.  It was prepared by adding discontinuous cellulose microfiber (with an average length of
500 micrometers) at various mass ratios (1,2,3,4 & 5 mass%) to the powder of
conventional GIC using a high speed mixing device.
 Incorporation of alumina fibres into the glass powder –It improve flexural strength.
 This material is also called as Polymeric Rigid Inorganic Matrix Material.
 ADVANTAGES :
1) increased depth of cure
2) reduced polymerization shrinkage
3) improved wear resistance
4) Increase flexural strength (50MPa)

65.  Giomer utilizes the hybridization of GIC and composite by using a unique technology
called the prereacted glass ionomer technology. The fluoro aluminosilicate glass is
reacted with polyalkenoic acid to yield a stable phase of GIC this pre reacted glass is
then mixed with the resin.
Eg: Beautifil, Reactmer
INDICATIONS -
1) Class I, II, III, IV, and Class V cavities
2) Restoration of cervical erosion and Root caries
3) Laminates and core build up
4) Restoration of primary teeth.
5) Repair of fracture of porcelain and composites

66. BEAUTIFIL II PINK KIT BEAUTIFIL II WHITE KIT

67. ADVANTAGES-
1) Good aesthetics
2) Ease of handling
3) Improved physical properties
4) Formation of an acid-resistant layer

68.  Amalgomer technology is also called as ceramic reinforced GIC.
 These are restorations which are glass ionomer based but with the strength and
durability of amalgam.
ADVANTAGES-
1) High fluoride release
2) Natural adhesion to tooth structure
3) Good aesthetics
4) Excellent biocompatibility
5) Exceptional wear characteristics
6) Requires minimal cavitypreparation
7) Higher compressive and diametral tensilestrength
8) It prevents shrinkage, creep, corrosion, or thermal
conductivity problems associated with other filling materials.

69.  It is developed to increase the anticariogenic action of GIC. Still under experimental
stage.
 It increases its antibacterial activity without altering its physical and mechanical
properties.

70.  Amino acid-containing GIC
 It has better surface hardness properties than commercial Fuji IX GIC.
 This formulation of fast-set glass ionomer showed increased water sorption without
adversely affecting the amount of fluoride release.
 Considering its biocompatibility, this material shows promise not only as a dental
restorative material but also as a bone cement with low cytotoxicity.

71.  Incorporation of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate into a glass-
ionomercement.
 Incorporation of 1.56% w/w CPP/ACP into the GIC significantly increased microtensile
bond strength (33%) and compressive strength (23%) and significantly enhanced the
release of calcium, phosphate and fluoride ions at neutral and acidic pH.
 Eg.Fuji VII TMEP

72.  A potential substitute for miracle mix. The diametral tensile strength of zirconia containing
GIC significantly greater than that of Miracle mix due to better interfacial bonding Between
the particles and matrix.
 ADVANTAGES-
1) Ease of handling
2) Sustained fluoride release
3) Increased Strength anddurability
1) Used esp. in patients with high caries index
1) Eliminates mercury hazards

73.  Nano hydroxyapatite / fluorapatite particles added to FUJI II GC-it is a
promising restorative dental material with both improved mechanical
properties and improved bond strength to dentin
 Leads to wider particle size distribution with higher mechanical values

74.  Nanohydroxyapatite/fluoroapatite added cements exhibited high compressive
strength (177–179 MPa), high diametral tensile strength (19–20 MPa) and high
biaxial flexural strength (26–28 MPa)
Indications-
1. Primary teeth restorations
2. Class I, III, IV restorations
3. Core build-up

75.  A hybrid product with a composition between that of calcium aluminate and GIC, designed
for luting fixed prosthesis.
 The calcium aluminate component is made by sintering a mixture of high-purity Al₂O₃ and
CaO (approximately 1 : 1 ratio) to create monocalcium aluminate.

76.  The main ingredients in the powder of this hybrid cement are calcium
aluminate, polyacrylic acid, tartaric acid, strontium-fluoro-alumino-glass,
and strontium fluoride.
 The liquid component contains 99.6% water and 0.4% additives for
controlling setting.

77.  These are newer bioactive materials developed by incorporating hydroxyapatite within
glass ionomer powder.
 These are mainly being used as bone cements in oral maxillofacial surgery and may a
future role as retrograde filling material.
 They have a role in bonding directly to bone and affect its growth and development.

78.  Developed to enable release fluoride when the oral pH is low. Apperantly called
“Smart” materials.
 The F release is episodic and not continuous which helps to prolong the therapeutic
usefulness of the material.

79.  Many years have passed by since the glass ionomer cement was first invented and it
has been a popular material from the time it was introduced into the market.
 Even though the stronger and more esthetic materials were available, glass ionomer
restorations still remained the choice of many practitioners because they satisfy many
of the characteristics of ideal cement.

80. REFERENCES
• Glass ionomer cement by Alan D.Wilson and John W. Mclean
• Philips science of dental materials, 12th ed
• Sturdevant’s Art and science of operative dentistry, Fifth edition
• Craig’s Restorative dental materials, 14th edition
• G J Mount and R W Hume Text book of Minimal intervention dentistry.