Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 20, 2026

Author Spotlight: Simulation and Analysis of the Temperature Rise of Ring Main Unit Equipment
Published on: July 5, 2024
Comparative Assessment of Microleakage in Nanoformulated and Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement under Simulated Aging:
Aleena Alex1, Jessy Paulraj1, Tm Ngoubinah Pretty1
1Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Aim:
The aim of the study is to assess the microleakage of nanoformulated and conventional glass ionomer cements (GICs) under simulated aging.
Materials And Methods:
Nanoformulated GIC was synthesized by incorporating chitosan-titanium-zirconia-hydroxyapatite (Ch-Ti-Zr-HA) nanoparticles into GIC powder at concentrations of 3%, 5%, and 10%. The materials were characterized using UV-visible diffuse reflectance spectroscopy (UV-DRS) and X-ray diffraction (XRD). A total of forty freshly extracted, sound permanent molar teeth were selected for the study and divided into four groups: Group I (3% nanoformulated GIC), group II (5% nanoformulated GIC), group III (10% nanoformulated GIC), and group IV (conventional GIC). Standardized class I cavities were prepared on the occlusal surfaces, restored, and subjected to thermocycling between 5°C and 55°C with a dwell time of 30 seconds in a water bath. To prevent dye penetration, root apices were sealed, and all tooth surfaces-except the restoration and a 1 mm margin around it-were coated with two layers of nail varnish. The specimens were then immersed in a 0.5% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. Following immersion, the teeth were sectioned mesiodistally, and the extent of microleakage was assessed under a stereomicroscope using a predefined scoring system. The collected data were statistically analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Bonferroni test.
Results:
The least microleakage was observed in the 5% and 10% nanoformulated GIC groups, with no statistically significant difference between them (p = 0.699). The 3% nanoformulated GIC and the conventional GIC (control group) exhibited similar performance, with no significant difference. However, compared to the control group, both 5% and 10% nanoformulated GICs showed superior results, with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05).
Conclusion:
The findings of this study indicate that incorporating nanotechnology is a valuable approach to enhancing the clinical performance of GIC. 5% and 10% nanoformulated GIC containing Ch-Ti-Zr-HA demonstrates significant potential as a restorative material, offering microleakage resistance superior to conventional GIC.
How To Cite This Article:
Alex A, Paulraj J, Ngoubinah Pretty TM, et al. Comparative Assessment of Microleakage in Nanoformulated and Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement under Simulated Aging: A Stereomicroscopic Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2025;18(12):1471-1477.
Related Concept Videos
04:35Comparative Study of Simulation of Temperature Rise in Ring Main Unit
06:58Frailty Assessment in an Aging Mouse Model
11:13In Vitro Permeation of FITC-loaded Ferritins Across a Rat Blood-brain Barrier: a Model to Study the Delivery of Nanoformulated Molecules
08:45Study of Siphon Breaker Experiment and Simulation for a Research Reactor
15:00Assessing Dyslexia at Six Year of Age
09:30Behavioral Assessment of the Aging Mouse Vestibular System

