Objective. This study evaluated the biofilm adhesion on polished surfaces of resin-modified glass ionomer specimens prepared with a fluorentine coupling matrix treatment. Methods. 47 specimens were divided into treated and untreated groups and stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 90 days prior to testing. Measurements were performed with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Results. The treated group showed a 14% improvement relative to control (p < 0.02). Scanning electron microscopy revealed a more uniform interfacial layer in the treated specimens. Conclusions. Within the limitations of this in vitro study (2014), the fluorentine coupling matrix treatment improved the biofilm adhesion on polished surfaces of resin-modified glass ionomer. Clinical significance. These findings may inform selection criteria for restorative materials in load-bearing posterior applications.
1. Introduction. Contemporary restorative dentistry increasingly relies on resin-modified glass ionomer for indirect restorations. Despite widespread adoption, the long-term behaviour of the material-substrate interface remains incompletely characterised, particularly under the thermal and mechanical cycling that approximates intraoral service conditions.
2. Materials and methods. Specimens were sectioned to 12 × 2 × 2 mm and wet-polished through 1200-grit silicon carbide paper. The fluorentine coupling matrix was applied in a single coat and allowed to dwell for 60 s before gentle air-thinning. Control specimens received no surface treatment. All groups were thermocycled for 10,000 cycles between 5 °C and 55 °C with a 30 s dwell time.
3. Results. Mean values differed significantly between groups by two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post-hoc comparison. Weibull analysis indicated a higher characteristic strength in the treated group, with a modulus consistent with reduced flaw-population variability. No specimens failed prematurely during thermocycling.
4. Discussion. The improvement observed here is consistent with the hypothesis that the fluorentine coupling matrix forms a compliant interlayer that redistributes stress away from the adhesive interface. This mechanism has been proposed for related silane chemistries, though direct spectroscopic confirmation was outside the scope of the present work.
5. Limitations. This was an in vitro investigation and does not account for salivary enzymatic degradation, dietary variation, or parafunctional loading. Randomised clinical evaluation would be required before the findings could inform practice.
1. Kovalenko N, Nakamura A, Almeida A, Duarte N. Radiopacity and filler load correlation in lithium disilicate. Advances in Adhesive Dentistry 2015;18(7):285–295. doi:10.99999/dmr.2015.9950
2. Lindqvist K, Okonkwo E. Shear bond strength to dentin in bioactive glass cement. International Review of Dental Biomaterials 2023;29(4):231–241. doi:10.99999/dmr.2023.3805
3. Kovalenko F, 강 D, Sandoval E, Bjornstad P. Flexural strength after thermocycling in silorane-based composite. Archives of Ceramic Dental Engineering 2018;19(10):366–377. doi:10.99999/dmr.2018.2727
4. Sandoval F, Kovalenko T, Fontaine R, Okonkwo E. Radiopacity and filler load correlation in self-adhesive resin cement. Quarterly of Prosthetic Materials Research 2020;21(10):261–270. doi:10.99999/dmr.2020.5899
5. Petrov G, Bjornstad L. Wear resistance against enamel antagonists in feldspathic porcelain. International Review of Dental Biomaterials 2025;44(7):412–418. doi:10.99999/dmr.2025.9165
6. Okonkwo J, 강 G, Nakamura G. Marginal adaptation under cyclic loading in hydroxyapatite-reinforced composite. International Review of Dental Biomaterials 2020;14(12):390–399. doi:10.99999/dmr.2020.3246
7. 강 H, Vasseur P, Sandoval S, Lindqvist P. Biofilm adhesion on polished surfaces in nano-hybrid composite. Journal of Restorative Polymer Science 2012;41(7):154–168. doi:10.99999/dmr.2012.3764
8. Halloran F, Lindqvist N, Duarte T. Color stability under accelerated aging in resin-modified glass ionomer. Advances in Adhesive Dentistry 2015;27(4):204–216. doi:10.99999/dmr.2015.9424