The aim of this study was to compare the potential of standard ion-releasing materials to repair demineralized lesions with recently introduced alkasite and glass hybrid materials. Glass ionomer (GC Fuji TRIAGE), two glass hybrids (EQUIA Forte HT, Riva SC), calcium silicate cement (Biodentine) and an alkasite (Cention Forte) were tested. A total of 72 human third molars were used for sample preparation; on the dentine surface, a class-I cavity was prepared, and one half was covered with nail varnish. The teeth were subjected to a demineralization protocol, filled with the examined materials, and cut in half. The evaluation included a dentine microhardness assessment (n = 10) and SEM/EDS analysis (n = 2). The results were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 statistical software and compared using an analysis of variance and Scheffe post-hoc test. The statistical significance level was set to 0.05. Mean microhardness values (HV0.1) after 14 and 28 days were, respectively: EQUIA Forte HT (26.7 ± 1.45 and 37.74 ± 1.56), Riva Self Cure (19.66 ± 1.02 and 29.58 ± 1.18), Cention Forte (19.01 ± 1.24 and 27.93 ± 1.33), Biodentine (23.35 ± 1.23 and 29.92 ± 1.02), GC Fuji TRIAGE (25.94 ± 1.35 and 33.87 ± 5.57) and control group (15.57 ± 0.68 and 15.64 ± 0.82). The results were significantly different between most groups (p < 0.001). SEM/EDS revealed varying patterns, material deposits and distinct elemental variations. To conclude, all materials increased microhardness and affected the dentine surface appearance and chemical composition; EQUIA Forte HT demonstrated the most pronounced effects.
Keywords: alkasite; dentine; glass hybrids; glass-ionomer cements; ion-releasing materials; microhardness.