UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL PAULISTA
“JÚLIO DE MESQUITA FILHO”
Instituto de Ciência e Tecnologia
Campus de São José dos Campos
ORIGINAL ARTICLE DOI: https://doi.org/10.4322/bds.2025.e4618
1
Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4618
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
10.4322/bds.2025.e4618
Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer cements, a key material for older adults restorations
Andrade CA et al.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
e4618
28
2
Apr/Jun
Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer
cements, a key material for older adults restorations
Análise da alteração de cor e translucidez de cimentos de ionômero de vidro, um material chave para restaurações em idosos
Carolina Alves ANDRADE1 , Letícia Marinho Silva ROCHA1 , Eric Mayer dos SANTOS1 ,
Carlos Alberto Kenji SHIMOKAWA1 , Maria Ângela Pita SOBRAL1
1 - Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia, Departamento de Dentística. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
How to cite: Andrade CA, Rocha LMS, Santos EM, Shimokawa CAK, Sobral MAP. Analysis of color change and translucency of glass
ionomer cements, a key material for older adults restorations. Braz Dent Sci. 2025;28(2):e4618. https://doi.org/10.4322/bds.2025.e4618
ABSTRACT
Objective: This study evaluated color change (ΔE00) and translucency (TP) of GICs over 3 months. Materials and
Methods: Discs (n = 5) of conventional (ION-Z [IZ], Maxxion R [MX], Vidrion R [VR], Riva Self Cure [RSC], GC
Gold Label 9 [G9] and resin-modied GICs (GC Gold Label 2 [G2], Equia Forte [EF]) were prepared and stored in
distilled water. Color measurements were taken (3x/disc) with a reectance spectrophotometer at 5 experimental
times: immediately after preparation; after 1 hour (1h), 1 day (1d), 1 week (1w), and 3 months (3m). Data were
analyzed using two-way repeated-measures ANOVA/Tukey test (α= 0.05). Results: After 3 months, all GICs
presented perceptible ΔE00, with MX and RSC exhibiting the highest values. EF consistently showed acceptable
ΔE00 (p< 0.05). MX and RSC showed the highest TP after 1h and throughout (p<0.05). G2, RSC, G9, and VR
showed their highest TP values at 1w and 3m, with no differences between these times (p≥0.05). IZ showed the
highest TP at 1d and 1w, and EF’s greatest TP was at 3m. Conclusion: GICs showed perceptible color changes with
unstable translucency. EF maintained acceptable color change.
KEYWORDS
Color; Dental care for aged; Dental restoration failure; Glass ionomer cements; Colorimetry.
RESUMO
Objetivo: Este estudo avaliou a alteração de cor (ΔE00) e a translucidez (TP) de CIVs ao longo de 3 meses.
Material e Métodos: Discos (n = 5) de CIVs convencionais (ION-Z [IZ], Maxxion R [MX], Vidrion R [VR], Riva
Self Cure [RSC], GC Gold Label 9 [G9]) e CIVs modicados por resina (GC Gold Label 2 [G2], Equia Forte [EF])
foram preparados e armazenados em água destilada. As medições de cor foram realizadas (3x/disco) com um
espectrofotômetro de reectância em 5 tempos experimentais: imediatamente após o preparo; após 1 hora (1h), 1
dia (1d), 1 semana (1s) e 3 meses (3m). Os dados foram analisados usando ANOVA de medidas repetidas de dois
fatores com teste de Tukey (α= 0,05). Resultados: Após 3 meses todos os CIVs apresentaram ΔE00 perceptível,
com MX e RSC exibindo os maiores valores. EF consistentemente apresentou ΔE00 aceitável (p < 0,05). MX e
RSC apresentaram a maior TP após 1h e ao longo do tempo (p < 0,05). G2, RSC, G9 e VR apresentaram seus
maiores valores de TP em 1s e 3m, sem diferenças entre esses tempos (p ≥ 0,05). IZ apresentou a maior TP em
1d e 1s, e o maior TP de EF foi em 3m. Conclusão: Os CIVs apresentaram alterações de cor perceptíveis com
translucidez instável. EF manteve uma alteração de cor aceitável.
PALAVRAS-CHAVE
Cor; Saúde bucal para idosos; Falha de restauração dentária; Cimentos de ionômero de vidro; Colorimetria.
2
Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4618
Andrade CA et al.
Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer cements, a key material for older adults restorations
Andrade CA et al. Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer
cements, a key material for older adults restorations
INTRODUCTION
Glass ionomer cement (GIC) is a widely used
restorative material in dentistry, particularly for
the treatment of non-carious cervical lesions
(NCCL) [1-5] and root caries [6,7]. It stands out
due to its benets, including uoride release [8],
biocompatibility [9], and chemical adhesion [10],
which are essential characteristics for restorative
materials, especially in older adults [7].
With the population aging [11], the older
adults require more support regarding the
maintenance of oral health. According to the
literature [7], restorative materials for older
populations must promote remineralization and
have adhesive proprieties. Moreover, studies
indicate that the retention rates of GICs, especially
resin modified GICS (rmGICs), in NCCLs are
comparable to or even superior to those of resin-
based composites [1,2]. Also, aged dentin treated
with GIC has shown less microleakage when
compared to young dentin [12]. Therefore, GIC
should be a material of choice for restoring NCCL
in older adults [5].
However, despite their clinical advantages,
GICs may be underused due to their esthetic
limitations when compared to resin composites.
Resin-modied GIC is preferred when esthetics
are a concern, as it provides improved color
matching and faster setting time, mainly due to
its resin components, including inorganic llers
and photoinitiators; while conventional GIC is
recommended for patients with xerostomia or
those at high risk of caries due to its sustained
fluoride release, which provides effective
control of caries lesion, making it suitable for
both routine clinical care and functionally
dependent patients [5,7]. Additionally, GIC is
an appropriate option for treating root caries in
elderly individuals [6], a population at increased
risk for such lesions [13-16] due to reduced
salivary ow [17] and gingival recession [18],
which are common in this age group. Although
GIC has lower mechanical proprieties compared
to other materials [19], these proprieties are
adequate for older adults who typically do not
exert high occlusal forces [7].
Esthetic considerations also play an important
role in restorative dentistry for older adults.
Research shows that individuals entering their 60s
place signicant value on dental aesthetics [20].
Another study conducted on 75-year-olds
demonstrated that dental appearance remains a
priority, inuencing how elderly individuals are
perceived socially and professionally [21]. As
such, a restorative material must not only have
satisfactory mechanical properties but also meet
esthetic demands, which can contribute to the
well-being and quality of life of older adults.
A restoration is considered aesthetically
appropriate when it accurately reproduces
the optical properties of the natural tooth
structure [22], with color and translucency
playing an important role in achieving this
outcome [23]. However, GIC undergoes color
and translucency changes over time [24] due
to water sorption and solubility within the oral
cavity [25,26], which can vary across brands.
While GICS may have lower abrasion resistance
and inferior mechanical properties compared to
composite resin [27], they offer advantages such
as reduced chair time [2], lower costs [3], and a
lower risk of restoration loss in NCCLs [5].
Thus, understanding the optical properties
of GICs is crucial for predicting color and
translucency changes over time, especially for
treatments in esthetically affected areas, such
as root caries, or NCCLs in older adults anterior
teeth. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate
the color change (∆E00) and translucency
(TP) of commercially available conventional
restorative GICs and resin-modied GICs over
three months. The hypothesis was: GICs analyzed
in this study presented color and translucency
change, affecting color selection and aesthetics
of restorations.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Specimen preparation
Discs were prepared using commercially
available GICs: 5 conventional restorative
and 2 resin-modified (n = 5) (Table I). The
sample size was based on a previous similar
study [28]. The GIC discs were prepared using a
metal mold measuring 15 mm in diameter and
2 mm in height. Each material was manipulated
according to the manufacturer’s instructions for
use. Subsequently, the material was inserted
into the mold to ll it, using a Centrix syringe
to minimize the inclusion of voids and bubbles.
Two glass plates were pressed against each other
with the mold in between to ensure compression
and uniformity of the material in the mold. The
resin-modied materials were light cured from
3
Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4618
Andrade CA et al.
Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer cements, a key material for older adults restorations
Andrade CA et al. Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer
cements, a key material for older adults restorations
the top surface through the glass plate for the
time recommended by the manufacturer (Valo,
Ultradent Product Inc, South Jordan, USA), with
the radiance being checked by a radiometer
(Ecel RD-7, Ribeirão Preto, Brasil), while for the
conventional materials, the initial setting was
awaited and the GIC discs were removed from
the mold.
Analysis of color change and translucency
Ten minutes after light curing or initial
setting, all specimens’ color was measured using
a light spectrophotometer (CM-3700A, Konica
Minolta, Kojimachi, Tokyo). The light source
was provided by a wavelength range of 360 nm
to 740 nm, standard illuminant D65, a 10-degree
standard observer, and a black background.
The color and translucency were obtained
according to the CIEDE 2000 parameters L*, C*
and h°, and for whiteness evaluation, the L*,
a* and b* coordinates were used. L* stands for
lightness, a* stands for red/green coordinate,
b* for yellow/blue coordinate, C* for chroma
coordinate (distance for the lightness axis), and
h° for the hue angle, in degrees. Each specimen
was measured three times and the average initial
color and translucency values were obtained. The
specimens were stored in distilled water (10 mL
per specimen) at 37 °C. The same procedure was
performed at 4 experimental intervals: 1 hour
(1h), 1 day (1d), 1 week (1w), and 3 months
(3m). These intervals were selected to simulate
the progression of color and translucency changes
as the sorption and solubility dynamics evolve
in the oral environment, considering initial and
nal setting, and aging. Specimens were removed
from the water before each measurement, and the
excess water was removed using absorbent paper.
The mean value of the 3 readings performed at
each experimental time was considered for the
statistical analyses.
The color change (ΔE00) was calculated
according to the equation: ∆E00 = [(ΔL/kLSL)2 +
(ΔC/kCSC]2 + (ΔH/kHSH)2 + RT (ΔC*ΔH/
SC*SH)]1/2 [29] considering the initial time (10
minutes after photoactivation or initial setting),
and experimental time intervals. Color changes
were considered according to the previously
reported visual perceptibility and acceptability
thresholds for evaluation of the clinical relevance
of the results. Perceptibility indicates that values
above 0.81, according to CIEDE00, are visually
perceptible to the human eye. Values between
0.81 and 1.77 indicate that the color change is
visually perceptible and considered acceptable, and
values above 1.77 indicate that the color change
is visually perceptible and unacceptable [30]. The
translucency (TP), was obtained by calculating the
color difference against a white background and
against a black background in each experimental
time interval [30].
Statistical analyses
Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA and
Tukey tests were applied for all performed tests.
Table I - GICS investigated in this study
Group Product Code Composition
Conventional Ion-Z IZ FASV, AP e TA
(FGM, Joinville, SC, Brazil) (A3)
Maxxion R MX FASV e AP
(FGM, Joinville, SC, Brazil) (A3)
Vidrion R VR Sodium Fluorosilicate, Calcium, aluminum, barium
sulfate, AP and pigments.
(SS White, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil) (A3,5)
GC Gold Label 9 R G9 FASV, AP and polybasic carboxylic acid.
(GC Corporation, Tóquio, MT, Japão) (A3,5)
Riva Self Cure RSC FASV, AP and TA
(SDI, Melbourne, VIC, Australia) (A3)
Resin-modified GC Gold Label 2 LC R G2 FASV, AP and distilled water
(GC Corporation, Tóquio, MT, Japão) (A3)
Equia Forte EF FASV, AP, pigments, distilled water and polybasic
carboxylic acid.
(GC Corporation, Tóquio, MT, Japão) (A2)
Abbreviations: AP: polyacrylic acid; TA: tartaric acid; FASV: fluoraluminosilicate glass.
4
Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4618
Andrade CA et al.
Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer cements, a key material for older adults restorations
Andrade CA et al. Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer
cements, a key material for older adults restorations
A signicance level of 5% was considered for all
the tests. The statistical analyses were performed
using the Jamovi software version 2.3.28.0 (The
Jamovi Project, Sydney, Australia).
RESULTS
ΔE00 analysis
Figure 1 presents ΔE00 values for different
GICs at different experimental times. In the
rst hour, there was no statistically signicant
difference in ΔE between the GICs studied (p ≥
0.05). On the rst day, MX (6.88 ± 1.02) and
IZ (4.55 ± 1.46) presented the highest ΔE00
values, with no signicant difference between
them (p ≥ 0.05). After 1 week, MX (7.74 ± 1.70)
continued to show the highest color change,
with no statistically signicant differences from
IZ (5.36 ± 3.36) and RSC (5.22 ± 0.44) (p ≥
0.05). After 3 months, MX (7.34 ± 0.82) and
RSC (6.35 ± 0.94) presented the greatest color
changes (p < 0.05).
The analysis of the results obtained at the
experimental times for each material indicated
that IZ, VR, G9, G2, and EF exhibited stable
ΔE00 values (p < 0.05) throughout the 3-month
evaluation period. RSC showed an increase in
ΔE00 (p < 0.05) between the rst day and 1 week
(Figure 1). MX increased between 1 hour (3.82 ±
1.59) and 1 day (6.88 ± 1.02) (p < 0.05), and
then stabilized until the nal evaluation.
EF was the only material that did not
exhibit unacceptable ΔE00 values at any of
the experimental times evaluated. IZ, MX, and
G9 showed ΔE00 values that were visually
unacceptable during all the experimental times.
G2 presented visually unacceptable ΔE00 at
the 1-week and 3-month assessments. VR only
showed a visually acceptable color change in the
rst week, presenting unacceptable color changes
at the remaining experimental times.
Resin-modified GICs’ color remained
stable (p ≥ 0.05) throughout the assessment
period, as shown in Table II. There were no
significant differences in conventional GICs
between 1 week (4.51 ± 3.07) and 3 months
(3.14 ± 3.88) or between 1 day (2.72 ± 2.8) and
3 months, but there were signicant differences
between the other studied periods. There was a
signicant difference between resin-modied and
conventional GICs only on the rst day (Table II).
TP analysis
Table III shows the translucency at different
experimental times. After 1 hour, MX (0.79 ±
0.09) and RSC (0.90 ± 0.10) showed the highest
TP values. After 1 day, MX (7.97 ± 0.49)
continued to exhibit the highest TP mean,
followed by RSC (3.7 ± 0.14) (p < 0.05). After 1
Figure 1 - Mean and standard deviation of ΔE of GICs studied at different times. *Different capital letters indicate statistical difference
(p<0.05) between materials, and lowercase letters indicate statistical difference (p<0.05) between experimental times. *Baseline: 10
minutes; Legend: IZ – Ion-Z, MX – Maxxion R, VR – Vidrion R, G9 – GC Gold Label 9 R, RV – Riva Self Cure, G2 – GC Gold Label 2 LC R,
EF – Equia Forte.
5
Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4618
Andrade CA et al.
Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer cements, a key material for older adults restorations
Andrade CA et al. Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer
cements, a key material for older adults restorations
week, EF (1.12 ± 0.24) presented the lowest TP
value, while MX and RSC presented the highest
values. MX (4.96 ± 0.75). RSC (7.32 ± 0.72)
were the materials that presented the highest TP
values after 3 months. MX reached its peak value
after 1 day (Table III).
G2, RSC, G9 and VR presented their highest
TPs at the 1-week and 3-month evaluations, with no
signicant difference between these experimental
times (p ≥ 0.05). TP values for IZ increased from
1 hour to 1 day and then remained stable. MX
presented an important increase from 1 hour
(0.79 ± 0.09) to 1 day (7.97 ± 0.49), decreased
from 1 day to 1 week (5.63 ± 0.09), and then
stabilized thereafter. EF values did not signicantly
differ from 1 day (1.12 ± 0.24) to 1 week (1.43 ±
0.05) and increased at 3 months (3.79 ± 0.95). All
GICs showed an increase in TP from 1 hour to 3
months, except for IZ, which showed no difference
at 3 months but still showed increases at 1 day and
1 week compared to the 1-hour assessment.
DISCUSSION
It is expected that the color of a restorative
material will be stable from its initial setting
throughout its lifetime. Based on the results
of this study, it was observed that different
GICs exhibited varying behaviors in terms of
color change and translucency, highlighting
the difculty in achieving predictable aesthetic
outcomes with these materials.
Among the GICs studied, Equia Forte was the
most stable material in terms of color change and
acceptable color throughout the experimental
period; even though it exhibited translucency
alterations. Vidrion R, Gold Label 2, and Gold
Label 9 also demonstrated some color stability.
These findings suggest that these materials
may meet the esthetic expectations of older
adults, for whom natural appearance [20] in
restorations are of great importance. Conversely,
Riva Self Cure and Maxxion R exhibited the
most pronounced color changes and highest
translucency values at 3 months, indicating
limited esthetic predictability. Ion Z, Maxxion R,
and Gold Label 9 showed visually unacceptable
color changes at all time points, underscoring
the difculty in maintaining shade stability with
many GICs currently available.
None of the GICs showed translucency
stability across all experimental time points.
Therefore, according to the results, the hypothesis
was partially accepted, as color and translucency
changes were observed for all the analyzed GICs
in the long term, except for EF, which presented
color change considered acceptable.
Table II - Mean and standard deviation of ΔE00 of conventional and modified GIC at different times
Glass ionomer
Experimental times
1 hour 1 day 1 week 3 months
Conventional 2.43(1.68)Ad 3.68(2.1)Abc 4.56(2.71)Aa 4.25(2.3)Aac
Resin-modified 0.76(0.54)Aa 1.26(0.66)Ba 1.84(1.15)Aa 2.23(0.75)Aa
Different capital letters indicate statistical difference (p<0.05) between conventional and resin-modified glass ionomer cements, and
lowercase letters indicate statistical difference (p<0.05) between experimental times.
Table III - Mean and standard deviation of TP of GICs in different times
Ionomer
Experimental times
1 hour 1 day 1 week 3 months
IZ 0.21 (0.10)Cb 2.26 (0.21)CDa 2.64 (0.15)Ca 1.57 (0.14)Cab
MX 0.79 (0.09)Ac 7.97 (0.49)Aa 5.63 (0.09)Ab 4.96 (0.75)ABb
VR 0.58 (0.05)Bc 1.86 (0.12)Db 3.07 (0.47)Ca 2.52 (1.63)BCab
G9 0.43 (0.04)Bc 1.74 (0.08)DEb 2.79 (0.06)Ca 2.61 (0.94)BCab
RSC 0.90 (0.10)Ac 3.7 (0.14)Bb 6.15 (0.15)Aa 7.32 (0.72)Aa
EF 0.08 (0.03)Cc 1.12 (0.24)Eb 1.43 (0.05)Db 3.79 (0.95)BCa
G2 0.18 (0.07)Cc 2.66 (0.31)Cb 3.86 (0.22)Ba 3.15 (0.89)BCab
Different capital letters indicate statistical difference (p<0.05) between materials, and lowercase letters indicate statistical difference
(p<0.05) between experimental times.
6
Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4618
Andrade CA et al.
Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer cements, a key material for older adults restorations
Andrade CA et al. Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer
cements, a key material for older adults restorations
All materials exhibited increased translucency
over time, which was especially notable for
Maxxion R and Riva Self Cure. The incorporation
and loss of water is a major fact inuencing GIC
translucency. These ndings are consistent with
the understanding that water incorporation is
a key factor inuencing translucency in GICs.
Water acts as a solvent for polyacrylic acid
and facilitates the acid-base setting reaction
but also interacts with the cement matrix by
binding to metal ions and lling voids during the
setting reaction [25,26]. The gradual hydrolysis
of Si–O–Si bonds allows water molecules to
occupy space within the matrix, decreasing light
scattering and increasing translucency [25,26].
This process continues over time with material
exposure to saliva or, in this study, distilled water,
explaining the translucency increase observed
over 3 months. The need to protect restorations
during the early setting stage is therefore crucial.
Preventing the evaporation of unbound water
is essential to avoid surface microfractures and
increased opacity. Finishing glosses, petroleum
jelly, or light-cured coatings, depending on the
material and manufacturer’s instructions, help to
decrease these risks [31].
In esthetic areas, such as root caries and
cervical lesions in anterior teeeth, color and
translucency stability are essential for successful
shade matching and long-term esthetic outcomes.
Carious dentin often presents altered coloration,
which makes color matching more complex.
Studies with composite resins [32,33] have
demonstrated that substrates with discoloration
often require more opaque restorative materials
to achieve proper masking. Vattanaseangsiri et al.
(2022) [34] compared the translucency of a
conventional GIC to that of various resin-based
composites and demonstrated that the GIC had
the highest opacity, and it provided a less natural
aesthetic effect [34]. The study demonstrated
that the GIC showed increased translucency
after simulating a 3-year aging process, but
after 4 to 5 years of aging, the translucency
decreased again [34]. In the present study, this
difference was evaluated for 3 months, and
during this period there was also an increase in
translucency, as previously discussed. While such
an increase may improve esthetic integration
by approximating natural tooth translucency,
long-term stability is even more critical to ensure
predictable outcomes—especially in anterior
teeth of elderly patients [5,6]. showed that
10-minute delayed light-curing reduced color and
translucency change of a resin-modied GIC while
maintaining the mechanical characteristics [35],
suggesting this protocol could be a valuable
strategy for improving esthetic reliability.
A 72-month clinical study comparing a
RMGIC, Riva Light Cure, and resin composite
for carious cervical lesion found no signicant
difference in retention or marginal adaptation
between them, but greater color alteration was
noted for the RMGIC [36]. The RMGIC employed by
those authors [36] is from the same manufacturer
than Riva Self Cure, the conventional GIC with
the worst results in our study. These findings
emphasize that color and translucency instability
can compromise the long-term esthetic outcomes
of GICs in anterior teeth, raising doubts about their
use in highly esthetic zones.
A similar study evaluating translucency in
GICs [28], that compared common materials,
evaluated only 1 week after restoration and the
results differed from those of the present study
in this same experimental time. A hypothesis
for this difference might be the variation in the
specimens’ dimensions [37] because thickness is
an important factor while measuring translucency.
Uchimura et al. [28] analyzed specimens with a
thickness of 1 mm, while in the present study, the
specimens were prepared with a 2-mm thickness.
Furthermore, the use of different equipment for
evaluation can affect the sensitivity of the readings.
In both studies, the samples were stored under
similar conditions.
Some researchers have reached a consensus
that translucency would be of secondary importance
in the evaluation of a GIC, while compressive
strength, microhardness, degradation, and
fluoride release would be considered primary
factors [38]. Nonetheless, it would be interesting
to develop GICs with satisfactory mechanical
properties while maintaining their aesthetic
aspects, considering the growth of the population’s
aesthetic demand [9]. Resin-modied GICs showed
more stable esthetic behavior than conventional
ones, as expected [39], particularly Equia Forte,
which maintained acceptable color stability and is
supported in the literature for having acceptable
mechanical performance within the first six
months [3]. Although Gold Label 2 exhibited
an unacceptable color change after one week,
its behavior stabilized thereafter, and it has also
demonstrated satisfactory mechanical properties
7
Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4618
Andrade CA et al.
Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer cements, a key material for older adults restorations
Andrade CA et al. Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer
cements, a key material for older adults restorations
according to prior studies [38]. Therefore,
these materials appear to be moving towards a
combination of aesthetic and mechanical properties.
Despite the well-dened results of this research,
under controlled aging conditions in distilled water,
its three-month evaluation period represents a
limitation; therefore, a longer follow-up could
provide a greater representation of the color and
translucency behavior of GICs over time. Also, only
a limited range of resin-modied GICs was tested,
and the in-vitro design may not fully replicate the
clinical conditions. All specimens were standardized
at 2 mm to enable consistent comparisons; however,
translucency is thickness-dependent, which may
limit generalization to restorations of different
dimensions. Previous studies by Dinakaran (2014)
and Lima et al. (2018) [40,41] have evaluated
water sorption and solubility of GICs in different
storage solutions, but did not focus on optical
behavior. In clinical practice, external factors such as
exposure to pigmented beverages, tooth brushing,
and pH changes also affect optical properties.
Therefore, future research should include clinically
relevant conditions, such as artificial saliva,
extrinsic pigments, varied thicknesses, and longer
observational periods, to deepen our understanding
of the long-term esthetic performance of GICs.
CONCLUSION
Within the limitations of the current study,
it was concluded that conventional and resin-
modied GICs showed perceptible color changes
after the initial setting, and over time. Additionally,
none of the GICs showed translucency stability
across all the experimental times. Equia Forte was
the only material that showed acceptable color
changes at all experimental times.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Margery J.
Galbraith for her translation assistance.
Author’s Contributions
CAA: Data Curation, Formal Analysis,
Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation.
LMSR: Data Curation, Investigation. EMS: Validation,
Writing – Review & Editing. CAKS: Validation, Writing
– Review & Editing. MAPS: Conceptualization,
Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision,
Writing – Review & Editing
Conict of Interest
No conicts of interest declared concerning
the publication of this article.
Funding
The authors declare that no nancial support
was received.
Regulatory Statement
Ethics committee approval was not required.
REFERENCES
1. Bezerra IM, Brito ACM, Sousa SA, Santiago BM, Cavalcanti YW,
Almeida LFD. Glass ionomer cements compared with composite
resin in restoration of noncarious cervical lesions: A systematic
review and meta-analysis. Heliyon. 2020;6(5):e03969. http://
doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03969. PMid:32462087.
2. Patano A, Malcangi G, De Santis M, Morolla R, Settanni V, Piras
F,etal. Conservative treatment of dental non-carious cervical
lesions: a scoping review. Biomedicines. 2023;11(6):1530. http://
doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11061530. PMid:37371625.
3. Schwendicke F, Müller A, Seifert T, Jeggle-Engbert LM, Paris S,
Göstemeyer G. Glass hybrid versus composite for non-carious
cervical lesions: Survival, restoration quality and costs in
randomized controlled trial after 3 years. J Dent. 2021;110:103689.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103689. PMid:33979577.
4. Santos MJ, Ari N, Steele S, Costella J, Banting D. Retention of
tooth-colored restorations in non-carious cervical lesions--a
systematic review. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(5):1369-81. http://
doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1220-7. PMid:24671713.
5. Kampanas NS, Antoniadou M. Glass ionomer cements for
the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions in the geriatric
patient. J Funct Biomater. 2018;9(3):42. http://doi.org/10.3390/
jfb9030042. PMid:29986535.
6. Amer RS, Kolker JL. Restoration of root surface caries in
vulnerable elderly patients: a review of the literature. Spec
Care Dentist. 2013;33(3):141-9. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-
4505.2012.00302.x. PMid:23600986.
7. Huang Y, Song B, Zhou X, Chen H, Wang H, Cheng L. Dental
restorative materials for elderly populations. Polymers.
2021;13(5):828. http://doi.org/10.3390/polym13050828.
PMid:33800358.
8. Forsten L. Fluoride release and uptake by glass-ionomers
and related materials and its clinical effect. Biomaterials.
1998;19(6):503-8. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(97)00130-
0. PMid:9645556.
9. Pucinelli CM, Silva RAB, Borges LL, Borges ATN, Nelson-Filho
P, Consolaro A, etal. Tissue response after subcutaneous
implantation of different glass ionomer-based cements. Braz
Dent J. 2019;30(6):599-606. http://doi.org/10.1590/0103-
6440201902619. PMid:31800755.
10. Lin A, McIntyre NS, Davidson RD. Studies on the adhesion of
glass-ionomer cements to dentin. J Dent Res. 1992;71(11):1836-41.
http://doi.org/10.1177/00220345920710111401. PMid:1401448.
11. Ismail Z, Ahmad WIW, Hamjah SH, Astina IK. The impact of
population ageing: a review. Iran J Public Health. 2021;50(12):2451-
60. http://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v50i12.7927. PMid:36317043.
8
Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4618
Andrade CA et al.
Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer cements, a key material for older adults restorations
Andrade CA et al. Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer
cements, a key material for older adults restorations
12. Techa-Ungkul C, Sakoolnamarka R. The effect of dentin age
on the microshear bond strength and microleakage of glass-
ionomer cements. Gerodontology. 2021;38(3):259-66. http://
doi.org/10.1111/ger.12520. PMid:33354808.
13. Zhang J, Leung KCM, Sardana D, Wong MCM, Lo ECM. Risk
predictors of dental root caries: a systematic review. J Dent.
2019;89:103166. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2019.07.004.
PMid:31301318.
14. Fure S. Ten-year cross-sectional and incidence study of coronal
and root caries and some related factors in elderly Swedish
individuals. Gerodontology. 2004;21(3):130-40. http://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1741-2358.2004.00025.x. PMid:15369015.
15. Kassebaum NJ, Bernabé E, Dahiya M, Bhandari B, Murray CJ,
Marcenes W. Global burden of untreated caries: a systematic
review and metaregression. J Dent Res. 2015;94(5):650-8.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0022034515573272. PMid:25740856.
16. Gavinha S, Melo P, Costa L, Monteiro PM, Manso MC. Dental
tooth decay profile in an institutionalized elder population
of Northern Portugal. Braz Dent Sci. 2020;23(2). http://doi.
org/10.14295/bds.2020.v23i2.1940.
17. Diaz de Guillory C, Schoolfield JD, Johnson D, Yeh CK, Chen S,
Cappelli DP,etal. Co-relationships between glandular salivary
flow rates and dental caries. Gerodontology. 2014;31(3):210-9.
http://doi.org/10.1111/ger.12028. PMid:23289887.
18. Lamster IB, Asadourian L, Del Carmen T, Friedman PK. The aging
mouth: differentiating normal aging from disease. Periodontol
2000. 2016;72(1):96-107. http://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12131.
PMid:27501493.
19. Nicholson JW, Sidhu SK, Czarnecka B. Enhancing the mechanical
properties of glass-ionomer dental cements: a review. Materials.
2020;13(11):2510. http://doi.org/10.3390/ma13112510.
PMid:32486416.
20. Carlsson GE, Johansson A, Johansson AK, Ordell S, Ekbäck
G, Unell L. Attitudes toward dental appearance in 50- and
60-Year-old subjects living in Sweden. J Esthet Restor
Dent. 2008;20(1):46-55. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-
8240.2008.00148.x. PMid:18237340.
21. Johansson A, Omar R, Carlsson GE, Sannevik J, Mastrovito
B, Johansson AK. Satisfaction with dental appearance in two
cohorts of 75-year-olds examined in 2007 and 2017: a repeated
cross-sectional study. J Oral Rehabil. 2022;49(11):1060-8. http://
doi.org/10.1111/joor.13361. PMid:35962634.
22. Schmeling M, Andrada MA, Maia HP, Araújo EM. Translucency
of value resin composites used to replace enamel
in stratified composite restoration techniques. J Esthet
Restor Dent. 2012;24(1):53-8. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-
8240.2011.00419.x. PMid:22296696.
23. Lee YK. Translucency of human teeth and dental restorative materials
and its clinical relevance. J Biomed Opt. 2015;20(4):045002. http://
doi.org/10.1117/1.JBO.20.4.045002. PMid:25875626.
24. Prabhakar A, Pattanshetti K, Sugandhan S. A comparative study
of color stability and fluoride release from glass ionomer cements
combined with chlorhexidine. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2013;6(1):26-9.
http://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1181. PMid:25206183.
25. Sidhu SK, Nicholson JW. A review of glass-ionomer cements
for clinical dentistry. J Funct Biomater. 2016;7(3):16. http://doi.
org/10.3390/jfb7030016. PMid:27367737.
26. Nicholson JW. Chemistry of glass-ionomer cements: a review.
Biomaterials. 1998;19(6):485-94. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-
9612(97)00128-2. PMid:9645554.
27. Boing TF, Geus JL, Wambier LM, Loguercio AD, Reis A, Gomes OMM.
Are glass-ionomer cement restorations in cervical lesions more long-
lasting than resin-based composite resins? a systematic review and
meta-analysis. J Adhes Dent. 2018;20(5):435-52. PMid:30349908.
28. Uchimura JYT, Sato F, Santana RG, Menezes-Silva R, Bueno LS, Borges
AFS,etal. Translucency parameter of conventional restorative glass-
ionomer cements. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021;33(6):935-42. http://
doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12685. PMid:33188585.
29. Luo MR, Cui G, Rigg B. The development of the CIE 2000 colour-
difference formula: CIEDE2000. Color Res Appl. 2001;26(5):340-
50. http://doi.org/10.1002/col.1049.
30. Johnston WM, Ma T, Kienle BH. Translucency parameter of
colorants for maxillofacial prostheses. Int J Prosthodont.
1995;8(1):79-86. PMid:7710631.
31. Yilmaz MN, Gul P, Kiziltunc A. Water sorption and solubility of
a high-viscous glass-ionomer cement after the application of
different surface-coating agents. Eur J Gen Dent. 2020;9(3):118-
21. http://doi.org/10.4103/ejgd.ejgd_50_20.
32. Perez BG, Gaidarji B, Palm BG, Ruiz-López J, Pérez MM,
Durand LB. Masking ability of resin composites: effect of
the layering strategy and substrate color. J Esthet Restor
Dent. 2022;34(8):1206-12. http://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12942.
PMid:35851989.
33. Perez BG, Gaidarji B, Righes DZ, Pecho OE, Pereira GKR, Durand
LB. Masking ability of resin composites: a scoping review. J
Esthet Restor Dent. 2023;35(2):333-44. http://doi.org/10.1111/
jerd.12976. PMid:36260930.
34. Vattanaseangsiri T, Khawpongampai A, Sittipholvanichkul
P, Jittapiromsak N, Posritong S, Wayakanon K. Influence of
restorative material translucency on the chameleon effect.
Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):8871. http://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-
12983-y. PMid:35614191.
35. Nejatifard M, Panahandeh N, Ghasemi A, Torabzadeh H.
Effect of delayed light-curing on solubility, color stability, and
opacity of Fuji II LC glass ionomer cement: original article.
Braz Dent Sci. 2022;25(2):e2467. http://doi.org/10.4322/
bds.2022.e2467.
36. Koç-Vural U, Kerimova-Köse L, Kiremitci A. Long-term clinical
comparison of a resin-based composite and resin modified glass
ionomer in the treatment of cervical caries lesions. Odontology.
2025;113(1):404-15. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-024-00958-6.
PMid:38837034.
37. Navarro MFL, Pascotto RC, Borges AFS, Soares CJ, Raggio DP,
Rios D,etal. Consensus on glass-ionomer cement thresholds
for restorative indications. J Dent. 2021;107:103609. http://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103609. PMid:33610589.
38. Moshaverinia M, Navas A, Jahedmanesh N, Shah KC,
Moshaverinia A, Ansari S. Comparative evaluation of the physical
properties of a reinforced glass ionomer dental restorative
material. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;122(2):154-9. http://doi.
org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.03.012. PMid:31326149.
39. Paravina RD, Ghinea R, Herrera LJ, Bona AD, Igiel C, Linninger
M,etal. Color difference thresholds in dentistry. J Esthet Restor
Dent. 2015;27(1, Suppl 1):S1-9. PMid:25886208.
40. Dinakaran S. Sorption and solubility characteristics of compomer,
conventional and resin modified glass-ionomer immersed in
various media. IOSR J Dent Med Sci. 2014;13(3):41-5. http://
doi.org/10.9790/0853-13314145.
41. Lima RBW, Farias JFG, Andrade AKM, Silva FDSCM, Duarte RM.
Water sorption and solubility of glass ionomer cements indicated
for atraumatic restorative treatment considering the time and
the pH of the storage solution. RGO. 2018;66(1):29-34. http://
doi.org/10.1590/1981-863720180001000043100.
9
Braz Dent Sci 2025 Apr/Jun;28 (2): e4618
Date submitted: 2024 Dec 03
Accept submission: 2025 May 09
Carlos Alberto Kenji Shimokawa
(Correponding address)
Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia, Departamento de
Odontologia Restauradora, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
E-mail: carlos.shimokawa@usp.br
Andrade CA et al.
Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer cements, a key material for older adults restorations
Andrade CA et al. Analysis of color change and translucency of glass ionomer
cements, a key material for older adults restorations
