OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether functionalization of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) with sodium trimetaphosphate (TMP) and stannous chloride (SnCl₂), individually or in combination, affects its resistance to demineralization, cytocompatibility, and mineralization-related cellular responses. METHODS: Six experimental RMGIC formulations were prepared: (1) RMGIC; (2) RMGIC + 14% TMP; (3) RMGIC + 400 ppm SnCl₂; (4) RMGIC + 14%TMP + 400 ppm SnCl₂; (5) RMGIC + 800 ppm SnCl₂; and (6) RMGIC + 14%TMP + 800 ppm SnCl₂. The anti-demineralization effect was evaluated using a pH-cycling model by determining final surface hardness (fSH), percentage of surface hardness loss (%SHL), and integrated subsurface hardness loss (ΔKHN). Biological performance was assessed by cell viability, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, and mineralized nodule formation. RESULTS: The modified RMGIC formulation showed significantly improved anti-demineralization performance compared with the unmodified RMGIC. Formulations containing both additives exhibited higher final surface hardness and lower surface (%SHL) and subsurface (ΔKHN) mineral loss than the unmodified RMGIC (p < 0.05), whereas formulations containing TMP or SnCl₂ alone showed intermediate effects. None of the modifications adversely affected cell viability, with all formulations maintaining viability above 95%. In addition, the combined incorporation of TMP and SnCl₂ significantly increased ALP activity and mineralized nodule formation compared with the unmodified RMGIC (p ≤ 0.0001), indicating enhanced mineralization-related cellular responses. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Incorporation of TMP and SnCl₂ enhanced RMGIC resistance to demineralization while maintaining cytocompatibility and promoting mineralization-associated responses. This functionalization strategy supports the development of multifunctional restorative materials with improved mineral protection and biological activity beyond the properties of conventional glass ionomer cements.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Danelon et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: