Repair bond strength of a new self-adhesive composite resin to three different resin-matrix ceramic CAD-CAM materials.

This study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength of two flowable composite resins to resin-matrix ceramic CAD-CAM materials.Fifty-four plates obtained from Lava Ultimate (LU), Cerasmart (CS), and Vita Enamic (VE) CAD-CAM blocks were assigned to nine groups: N0: Nova Compo SF (NCSF), N1: Silane/Single Bond Universal (SBU)/NCSF, N2: SBU/NCSF, N3: Silane/G-Premio Bond (GPB)/NCSF, N4: GPB/NCSF, G1: Silane/SBU/G-aenial Universal Injectable Composite (GUIC), G2: SBU/GUIC, G3: Silane/GPB/GUIC, G4: GPB/GUIC. After the repair procedures, shear bond strength values were analyzed. Silane pre-application decreased bond strength in most LU and CS groups but increased it in VE. NCSF performed better than GUIC in all CAD-CAM's with similar adhesive protocols. SBU in combination with NSCF had the highest bond strength among all repair procedures in LU and CS. Silane-containing universal adhesives in combination with self-adhesive resin composites should be used to repair resin-matrix ceramic materials.

Comparative evaluation of resin infiltration and fluoride varnish treatment for moderate to high caries risk adults: A randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the arresting effect of micro-invasive (resin infiltration) and non-invasive (fluoride varnish) treatment options on non-cavitated proximal lesions in individuals with moderate to high risk of caries. In addition, the study evaluated the effect of repeated dental examinations and oral hygiene motivation on daily flossing, brushing frequency, dietary habits, and gingival status. METHODS: The study was a randomized, controlled, prospective, and parallel-designed clinical trial. 60 adults were enrolled and randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to the treatment groups. Cariogram was used to assess the caries risk. The advising instruction for daily habits and oral hygiene by individual risk illustration was given to all participants. Two experienced examiners visually evaluated the severity and activity of the lesions by using the International Caries Detection and Assessment System and Nyvad Activity Assessment respectively. Radiographic scoring of the lesions was performed on bite-wing radiographs by the same examiners. The gingival index was used to check the gingival status of the patients at the initial and control sessions. After examination, resin infiltration (Icon) was applied to 30 subjects, while the other 30 received fluoride varnish (Clinpro White Varnish). The follow-up time was 18 months with 6-month intervals. RESULTS: According to the Pearson Chi-Square test, there was no difference in the arresting effect of resin infiltration and fluoride varnish (P= 0.491). Both treatment groups exhibited a notable arresting effect on non-cavitated lesions, achieving a success rate of 98% (55 out of 56) during the 18-month evaluation period. However, one lesion of a subject who received resin infiltration was observed to progress from an E2 score to cavitation. Furthermore, at the end of 18 months, the subjects' motivation for oral hygiene had increased, and gingival index score decreased from 2 to 1 in 15% of the subjects. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Both resin infiltration and fluoride varnish yielded satisfactory results in the treatment of non-cavitated proximal lesions in individuals with moderate to high risk of caries. Repeated motivational instructions were beneficial for patients in maintaining their daily oral hygiene habits and gingival health.

A 3-year randomized clinical trial evaluating two different bonded posterior restorations: Amalgam versus resin composite.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance and postoperative sensitivity of a posterior resin composite with that of bonded amalgam in 40 (n = 20) large sized cavities and to evaluate whether resin composite could be an alternative for bonded amalgam. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a randomized clinical trial. Twenty patients in need of at least two posterior restorations were recruited. Authors randomly assigned one half of the restorations to receive bonded amalgam and the other half to composite restorations. Forty bonded amalgams (n = 20) and composites (n = 20) were evaluated for their performance on modified-US Public Health Service criteria and postoperative sensitivity using visual analogue scale (VAS) for 36-months. RESULTS: Success rate of this study was 100%. First clinical alterations were rated as Bravo after 1 year in marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, anatomical form, and surface roughness for both amalgam and composite. At the 3(rd) year, overall "Bravo" rated restorations were 12 for bonded amalgam and 13 for resin composites. There were no significant differences among the VAS scores of composites and bonded amalgams for all periods (P > 0.05) except for the comparisons at the 3(rd) year evaluation (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitation of this study, both resin composite and bonded amalgam were clinically acceptable. Postoperative sensitivity results tend to decrease more in composite restorations rather than amalgams. Therefore, it was concluded that posterior resin composite can be used even in large sized cavities.

Effect of storage solutions on microhardness of crown enamel and dentin.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine alterations in microhardness of crown dentin and enamel, after 2 and 12-month storage in de-ionized water, 0.2% glutaraldehyde, Hanks' Balanced Salt Solution (HBSS), 0.1% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) or 0.1% thymol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Freshly extracted, nonsterile 60 intact human premolars were distributed to five groups. Six teeth from each group were evaluated after two, and other six teeth were evaluated after 12 months storage. After grinding and polishing of teeth, Vickers hardness was evaluated with making indentations on enamel and dentin, using a pyramid diamond indenter tip exerting 100 g load for 15 s. RESULTS: After 2 months storage in solutions, range of the hardness values (HV) of enamel and dentin were in between 315-357 and 64-67, respectively. However, 12 months storage of the teeth resulted in a statistically significant decrease in microhardness when compared to microhardness of teeth stored for 2 months (P = 0.001). Although the differences were not significant regarding solutions, all solutions decreased the microhardness both in enamel and dentin (P > 0.05). However, decrease in microhardness was relatively less in de-ionized water and thymol solutions while glutaraldehyde decreased microhardness the most: 63% for enamel and 53% for dentin. CONCLUSIONS: Microhardness of enamel and dentin was in an acceptable range when teeth were stored for 2 months in de-ionized water, glutaraldehyde, HBSS, NaOCl or in thymol; thus, teeth kept up to 2 months in these solutions can be used for mechanical in vitro tests. However, 12 months storage significantly decreased the microhardness of enamel and dentin.

Influence of surface treatment on the resin-bonding of zirconia.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of various surface treatments on the bonding of luting resin cements to zirconia under four-point bending. METHODS: Bar specimens (n = 200) (2 mm × 5 mm × 25 mm) were prepared from zirconia blocks (VITA In-Ceram YZ, Vita Zahnfabrik) with the cementation surface (2 mm × 5 mm) of groups of 40 treated in one of five ways: airborne particle abrasion with 50µm Al2O3 (GB), zirconia primer (Z-Prime Plus, Bisco) (Z), glaze ceramic (Crystall.Glaze spray, Ivoclar Vivadent) + hydrofluoric acid (GHF), fusion glass-ceramic (Crystall.Connect, Ivoclar Vivadent) (CC), or left untreated as control (C). Within each treatment, bars were cleaned ultrasonically for 15 min in ethanol and then deionized water before bonding in pairs with one of two luting resins: Panavia F 2.0, (Kuraray) (P); RelyX U-200 (3M/Espe) (R), to form 10 test specimens for each treatment and lute combination. Mechanical tests were performed and bond strengths (MPa) were subject, after log transformation, to analysis of variance, Shapiro-Wilk and Holm-Sidak tests; also log-linear contingency analysis of failure mode distribution; all with α = 0.05. Fracture surfaces were examined under light and scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: While the effect of surface treatment was significant (p = 1.27 × 10(-9)), there was no detected effect due to resin (p = 0.829). All treatments except CC (30.1 MPa ×/÷ 1.44)* were significantly better than the untreated control (24.8 MPa ×/÷ 1.35) (p = 3.28 × 10(-9)). While the effect of GB - which gave the highest mean strength (50.5 MPa ×/÷ 1.29) - was not distinguishable from that of GHF (39.9 MPa ×/÷ 1.29) (p = 0.082), it was significantly better than treatment with either CC or Z (33.1 MPa ×/÷ 1.48) (p < 0.05). (* After log transformation for analysis and back; asymmetric error bounds as s.d. in log values.) SIGNIFICANCE: The novel test method design, which has good discriminatory power, confirmed the value of gritblasting as a simple and effective treatment with low operator hazard. It gave the highest bond strengths regardless of the cement type. Glaze layer application followed by hydrofluoric acid-etching on zirconia before cementation might be viable for adhesive zirconia cementation, but represents a much greater hazard as well as having problems with thickness control.

Microleakage of 3 single-bottle self-etch adhesives having different solvents.

This study compared the microleakage from 3 single-bottle self-etch adhesives (SEAs) with a conventional etch and rinse (ER) system. Class V cavities were prepared on buccal and lingual surfaces at the cementoenamel junction of 40 extracted human third molars. The cavities were allocated into 4 groups (n = 20). The groups were treated with either a combination of composite resin and 1 of 3 SEAs, or with a conventional ER system. Dye penetration of the samples was performed by placing them in a fresh solution of India ink for 48 hours. After rinsing and sectioning, the samples were placed under a light microscope and evaluated for microleakage along occlusal (enamel) and gingival (dentin) margins. The data were analyzed statistically. Microleakage scores of the adhesives exhibited significant differences (P < 0.05). All 3 single-bottle SEAs tested exhibited more microleakage than the ER system. There was no difference in terms of microleakage between the enamel and dentin margins in the SEA-bonded specimens (P > 0.05). The ER system was more successful in sealing enamel than dentin.

Effects of etching and adhesive applications on the bond strength between composite resin and glass-ionomer cements

OBJECTIVE: This study determined the effects of various surface treatment modalities on the bond strength of composite resins to glass-ionomer cements. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Conventional (KetacTM Molar Quick ApplicapTM) or resin-modified (PhotacTM Fil Quick AplicapTM) glass-ionomer cements were prepared. Two-step etch-rinse & bond adhesive (AdperTM Single Bond 2) or single-step self-etching adhesive (AdperTM PromptTM L-PopTM) was applied to the set cements. In the etch-rinse & bond group, the sample surfaces were pre-treated as follows: (1) no etching, (2) 15 s of etching with 35% phosphoric acid, (3) 30 s of etching, and (4) 60 s of etching. Following the placement of the composite resin (FiltekTM Z250), the bond strength was measured in a universal testing machine and the data obtained were analyzed with the two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by the Tukey's HSD post hoc analysis (p=0.05). Then, the fractured surfaces were examined by scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: The bond strength of the composite resin to the conventional glass-ionomer cement was significantly lower than that to the resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (p<0.001). No significant differences were determined between the self-etching and etch-rinse & bond adhesives at any etching time (p>0.05). However, a greater bond strength was obtained with 30 s of phosphoric acid application. CONCLUSIONS: The resin-modified glass-ionomer cement improved the bond strength of the composite resin to the glass-ionomer cement. Both etch-rinse & bond and self-etching adhesives may be used effectively in the lamination of glass-ionomer cements. However, an etching time of at least 30 s appears to be optimal.

Shear bond strength of restorations applied to un-complicated crown fractures: an in vitro study.

BACKGROUND: Study was designed to evaluate shear bond strengths of different restorative techniques of uncomplicated enamel-dentin fractures in permanent incisors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty human mandibular incisors were divided into four groups. One-third of their anatomical crowns from the incisal edges were cut off in three groups, representing an uncomplicated enamel-dentin fracture. Intact teeth in group 1 were used as control. In group 2, edge fragments were reattached by flowable composite (Filltek Flowable Supreme XT). In group 3, teeth were restored with universal resin composite (Filtek Z 250). In group 4, pre-impregnated glass fiber sheet (everStickNet) was positioned onto fractured surface, and then restorations were completed with resin composite. Three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive system (Adper Scotchbond Multi Purpose) was used in all test groups. Shear bond strengths of all samples were determined in universal testing machine, and data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis followed by Mann-Whitney U tests. Failure types were observed by light microscope. RESULTS: Shear bond strength of sound teeth was significantly higher than those of restored teeth (P < 0.05). Mean shear bond strengths of the reattached teeth were lower than the other two restoration types; however, differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Load-bearing capacity of restored teeth was not as high as sound teeth in the uncomplicated crown fracture. However, shear bond strength of different types of restorations seems close to each other.

Effects of etching and adhesive applications on the bond strength between composite resin and glass-ionomer cements.

OBJECTIVE: This study determined the effects of various surface treatment modalities on the bond strength of composite resins to glass-ionomer cements. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Conventional (Ketac Molar Quick Applicap) or resin-modified (Photac Fil Quick Aplicap) glass-ionomer cements were prepared. Two-step etch-rinse & bond adhesive (Adper Single Bond 2) or single-step self-etching adhesive (Adper Prompt L-Pop) was applied to the set cements. In the etch-rinse & bond group, the sample surfaces were pre-treated as follows: (1) no etching, (2) 15 s of etching with 35% phosphoric acid, (3) 30 s of etching, and (4) 60 s of etching. Following the placement of the composite resin (Filtek Z250), the bond strength was measured in a universal testing machine and the data obtained were analyzed with the two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by the Tukey's HSD post hoc analysis (p=0.05). Then, the fractured surfaces were examined by scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: The bond strength of the composite resin to the conventional glass-ionomer cement was significantly lower than that to the resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (p<0.001). No significant differences were determined between the self-etching and etch-rinse & bond adhesives at any etching time (p>0.05). However, a greater bond strength was obtained with 30 s of phosphoric acid application. CONCLUSIONS: The resin-modified glass-ionomer cement improved the bond strength of the composite resin to the glass-ionomer cement. Both etch-rinse & bond and self-etching adhesives may be used effectively in the lamination of glass-ionomer cements. However, an etching time of at least 30 s appears to be optimal.

The influence of bonding agents on the decision to replace composite restorations.

UNLABELLED: This in vitro study evaluated the validity of the decision to replace of a restoration based upon the radiolucent zone beneath a resin composite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Class II cavities were prepared on the approximal surfaces of 40 molars. The teeth were divided into four groups. Clearfil SE Bond, PQ1 or Single Bond was applied in the experimental groups. No bonding agent was used in the control group. Following the restorations, digital radiographs were obtained and independently evaluated by two oral radiologists and two specialists in restorative dentistry to determine the need for replacement. The coronal portions of the teeth were then sectioned and the interfaces between the restorations and cavity walls were examined using an optical light microscope. Possible adhesive pooling and voids were examined under a light microscope. Inter-examiner reliability was evaluated with the Cohen's kappa (kappa) test. Sensitivity, specificity and negative and positive predictive values were calculated. Kruskal-Wallis, followed by the Mann-Whitney U-test, determined differences among the pooling thicknesses of the different adhesives. RESULTS: Various sensitivity and specificity degrees were obtained from the groups in which different adhesive systems were used. The PQ1 adhesive system was the best for identifying well-adapted restorations with the highest true non-replacement diagnosis (TND = 0.70). Clearfil SE Bond had the highest false positive scores. Adhesive pooling was significantly different in the experimental groups of the current study (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Replacement decisions for a resin composite restoration based upon digital images frequently resulted in false-positive or negative decisions.

Clinical evaluation of three desensitizing agents in relieving dentin hypersensitivity.

OBJECTIVES: This in vivo study determined whether the application of three different desensitizing agents on exposed dentin surfaces was effective in reducing dentin hypersensitivity in subjects with slight-to-moderate sensitivity. METHODS: Sixty patients with a history of sensitivity were included in this study. At baseline visit, the initial sensitivity levels were recorded using a visual analog scale (VAS). In order to activate the sensitivity, evaporative (air-blast) and thermal (chloraethyl) stimuli were applied to each subject. The subjects' responses to the stimuli were marked on the VAS. Then, the subjects were assigned to one of the treatment groups or to a placebo. The agents used were Seal&Protect (Dentsply DeTrey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany), Vivasens (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein) and BisBlock (BISCO, Schaumburg, IL, USA); whereas, distilled water was used as the placebo. The subjects were recalled after four weeks, and their responses were again recorded. RESULTS: The VAS scores of the treatment and placebo groups were not different from each other at baseline (p > 0.05), and thermal stimuli caused higher patient discomfort than evaporative stimuli (p < 0.05). Alleviation effects of the desensitizing agents were not significantly different from each other; however, the placebo was an exception (p < 0.05). The differences between the VAS scores at baseline and after four weeks were significant for all three desensitizing agents (p < 0.05). However, in the placebo group, the evaporative stimuli led to insignificant pain variations (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: It was concluded that the desensitizing agents used in this clinical study were effective in alleviating dentin hypersensitivity. Meanwhile, the placebo response was shown to play a significant role.

Fluoride release from esthetic restorative materials with and without adhesive.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the effect of surface coating containing fluoride on patterns and amounts of fluoride release from 5 esthetic restorative materials. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Twelve cylinders of each material were prepared in a plexiglass mold. The experimental groups (n = 6) were coated with 1 layer of fluoridated adhesive resin, Prompt L-Pop, while the control groups (n = 6) remained uncoated. Fluoride release into deionized water was measured on days 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28 using an ion analyzer. Results were evaluated statistically using repeated measure analysis of variance and Duncan test. RESULTS: In the uncoated materials, the highest fluoride-releasing material was a resin composite Ariston pHc (140.468 +/- 9.80) followed by Photac-fil (101.200 +/- 5.56), Ketac-fil (91.098 + 4.69), Hytac Aplitip (5.122 +/- 1.00), and Ecusit (0.310 +/- 0.18). Material-coating interaction was found to be significant, but the effect of surface coating was different for each material. Among the coated materials, conventional glass-ionomer cement Ketac-fil released the highest amount of fluoride (93.326 +/- 10.86), followed by Photac-fil (83.666 +/- 4.72), Ariston pHc (53.862 +/- 7.90), Hytac Aplitip (14.634 +/- 2.35), and Ecusit (1.355 +/- 0.29). CONCLUSION: Application of fluoridated adhesive affected fluoride release from each material in varying magnitudes.

Effect of antioxidant on coronal seal of dentin following sodium-hypochlorite and hydrogen-peroxide irrigation.

PURPOSE: To reduce the microleakage of a self-etching priming dentin adhesive with the use of antioxidant or bur finishing after sodium-hypochlorite or hydrogen-peroxide irrigation. METHODS: 70 single-root canals were enlarged and seven different treatment protocols were applied throughout the root canal treatment: The roots in Groups 1, 2, and 3 were irrigated with sodium-hypochlorite. Group 1 was used as the negative control with only sodium-hypochlorite irrigation whereas in Group 2, sodium-ascorbate was applied as an additional irrigation agent following sodium-hypochlorite. Irrigation procedure in Group 3 was same as in Group 1, however, after the roots in this group were obturated, cavities were cleaned off with a carbide bur (bur-finishing) to remove the effect of sodium-hypochlorite. Hydrogen-peroxide irrigation was used in Groups 4, 5 and 6; the procedural steps were similar to those of Groups 1, 2 and 3: hydrogen-peroxide in Group 4, sodium-ascorbate application in Group 5, and bur-finishing in Group 6. Group 7 was the positive control with saline irrigation alone. All roots were obturated with Diaket sealer and gutta-percha cones using cold lateral condensation technique immediately after irrigation. A self-etching priming adhesive plus resin composite was applied after the endodontic treatment. The microleakage of dentin margins was determined using dye-penetration technique with clearing process. RESULTS: The Kruskal-Wallis followed by Mann-Whitney test showed that both sodium-hypochlorite and hydrogen-peroxide deteriorated the marginal seal of the dentin adhesive (P < 0.05), however, following both irrigation solutions the use of sodium-ascorbate reduced the microleakage (P < 0.05). Additionally, when sodium-ascorbate or bur-finishing was applied to remove the deterioration caused by sodium-hypochlorite or hydrogen-peroxide, the microleakage scores obtained were not different from that of the positive control (P > 0.05).

The two-year clinical performance of esthetic restorative materials in noncarious cervical lesions.

BACKGROUND: Materials used in restoration of cervical lesions include resin-modified glass ionomer cements, polyacid-modified resin-based composites and resin-based composites. In this study, the authors evaluated the clinical performance of these materials over a two-year period. METHODS: Thirty patients were enrolled in this study. The authors placed in these patients 130 restorations, 24 of which were Vitremer (3M Dental Products, St. Paul, Minn.), 38 were F2000 Compomer (3M Dental Products), 46 were Dyract AP (Dentsply DeTrey, Konstanz, Germany) and 22 were Valux Plus (3M Dental Products). Enamel margins were not beveled, and no mechanical retention was placed. Two independent, calibrated examiners evaluated the restorations baseline and at one and two years after placement using modified U.S. Public Health Service criteria. RESULTS: Retention rates at the end of two years were 100 percent for Vitremer, 67 percent for F2000 Compomer, 68 percent for Dyract AP and 70 percent for Valux Plus. The retention rate of Vitremer was significantly higher than that of the others (P < .05). In other categories, however, Valux Plus had the most favorable performance (P < .05). No secondary caries was detected around any restoration. CONCLUSION: Vitremer, with its high retention rate, seems to be the most appropriate material for restoration of noncarious cervical lesions, though it does not have the esthetic properties of resin-based composites. All materials used in this study were in need of improvements. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Resin-modified glass ionomer cement, polyacid-modified resin-based composite and resin-based composite behaved differently in the restoration of noncarious cervical lesions. Therefore, clinicians should take factors such as esthetic needs and localization into account in selecting materials for such restorations.

Clinical evaluation of indirect resin composite and ceramic onlays over a 24-month period.

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical performance of ceramic and indirect resin composite onlays over a 24-month period. A total of 94 onlay restorations in 47 patients were included in this study. Cavities were prepared, full-arch impressions were taken, and onlays were fabricated in the laboratory. All restorations were placed with a dual-cured luting resin composite system. Restorations were evaluated at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Differences between Alpha scores were analyzed statistically. The recall rate of this study was 93.6%. At the six-month evaluation, one onlay failed due to pulpitis. Other than the color match, there was no significant difference between indirect resin composite and ceramic onlays (p > 0.05). For indirect resin composites, Alpha score differences pertaining to color match, marginal adaptation, and surface texture were found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05) between the baseline and the 24-month recall. For ceramic restorations, marginal adaptation criteria was the only significant difference over the 24-month period (p < 0.05). At the end of 24 months, both indirect resin composite and ceramic onlays were considered to be successful clinically.

Factors affecting microleakage of a packable resin composite: an in vitro study.

This study was designed to determine the effects of three factors on the microleakage of a packable resin composite: different adhesive systems (single-step self-etching adhesive or total-etch and one-bottle adhesive), the use of a flowable resin composite (as a liner) and the different techniques of cavity preparation. Sixty extracted non-carious human first and second molars were selected and randomly divided into six groups. Cervical cavities were prepared using the conventional technique on the distal sides and the air-abrasive technique was used on the mesial sides of the teeth. The experimental groups were restored with PQ1 + SureFil or Prompt L-Pop + SureFil with or without PermaFlo. In the control groups, only SureFil was used on 10 teeth and PermaFlo + SureFil was applied on the remaining 10 teeth. The restored teeth were stored in 100% humidity at 37 degrees C for 24 hours and thermocycled between 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C for 100 cycles. Each tooth was immersed in India ink for 48 hours, then sectioned. Dye penetration at the occlusal and gingival margins was scored by two independent operators. The data were statistically analyzed to assess the differences between the test and control groups. No significant differences among the adhesives in terms of the occlusal margins of the cavities were observed. However, PQ1 led to less microleakage compared to Prompt L-Pop at the gingival margins (p < 0.0062). When flowable resin composite was used with Prompt L-Pop, microleakage was reduced (p < 0.0125). However, no significant difference was observed between the two cavity preparation techniques (p > 0.0125).

Mechanical and fluoride release properties of titanium tetrafluoride-added glass-ionomer cement.

The aim of this study was to determine the fluoride-release and mechanical properties of a water-hardening glass-ionomer cement (GIC) (ChemFil Superior) when titanium tetrafluoride (TiF4) was added. Three experimental groups were prepared with TiF4 added to the liquid component of the material in concentrations of 0.5, 1, and 2%. The control group was the original form of the cement and free of TiF4. After the specimens (4 mm in diameter x 6 mm in length) were prepared, their compressive strength, microhardness, modulus of elasticity, and fluoride release were measured. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post-hoc test (Bonferroni/Dunn correction). The addition of TiF4 into GIC significantly reduced fluoride release from the material with the exception of 1% TiF4 (p < 0.0083). Compressive strengths of 0.5 and 1% TiF4-added GICs were higher than that of the original GIC, but it was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The differences among modulus of elasticity values of experimental and control groups were not significant (p > 0.05). Similarly, microhardness of GIC was not affected with TiF4 addition (p > 0.05).