5-year Clinical Performance of Resin Composite Versus Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Restorative System in Non-carious Cervical Lesions

10.2341/05-87 ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. B. Franco ◽  
A. R. Benetti ◽  
S. K. Ishikiriama ◽  
S. L. Santiago ◽  
J. R. P. Lauris ◽  
...  

Clinical Relevance A long-term evaluation of the materials' behavior is relevant for Class V restorations in which clinical performance is particularly challenging.

2016 ◽  
Vol 695 ◽  
pp. 3-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanda Mihaela Popescu ◽  
Mihaela Jana Ţuculină ◽  
Horia Octavian Manolea ◽  
Veronica Mercuţ ◽  
Monica Scrieciu

AIM: To evaluate the clinical performance of adhesive restorations of resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (RMGIC) compared with of resin composite (RC), and RMGIC liner base laminated with a resin composite in non carious cervical lesions (NCCL).METHODS: The randomized clinical trial included 45 patients (25-65 year-old), with at least two similar sized NCCL on premolars. After sample size calculation, 220 restorations were placed, according to one of the following groups: (G1) Resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Vitremer); (G2) a resin composite and an adhesive layer (Versaflo); (G3) RMGIC liner base laminated with a resin composite (Vitremer and Versaflo). The restorations were clinically followed every 6 months for up to 24 months using the USPHS modified criteria for clinical evaluation. Survival estimates for restoration longevity were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Log-rank test (P< 0.05) was used to compare the differences in the success rate according to the type of the restorative material.RESULTS: At the end of 24 months, 172 restorations were evaluated in 37 patients, with a recall rate of 82.22%. The type of restorative material used did not influence the longevity of the restorations. The survival rates for the follow-up were similar regarding the number of restored surfaces and the tooth (upper or lower premolar). Estimated survival rates of the restorations were 100%, 100%, 98,25% and 90,69% at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months of clinical evaluations, respectively. A statistically significant difference was observed between RMGIC and RC or RMGIC laminated with RC for color match, but no other significant difference was observed among the three types of restorations.CONCLUSIONS: The survival rates were similar for the three types of restorations in NCCL. Different types of materials demonstrated acceptable clinical performance in non-carious cervical lesions.


2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (6) ◽  
pp. 578-587 ◽  
Author(s):  
TC Fagundes ◽  
TJE Barata ◽  
E Bresciani ◽  
SL Santiago ◽  
EB Franco ◽  
...  

SUMMARY Purpose The purpose of this study was to comparatively assess the seven-year clinical performance of a one-bottle etch-and-rinse adhesive with resin composite (RC) and resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) restorations in noncarious cervical lesions. Methods and Materials One operator placed 70 restorations (35 restorations in each group) in 30 patients under rubber dam isolation without mechanical preparation. The restorations were directly assessed by two independent examiners, using modified US Public Health Service criteria at baseline and 6, 12, 24, 60, and 84 months. The obtained data were tabulated and statistically analyzed using the Fisher and McNemar tests. A difference was significant if p&lt;0.05. Results Twenty patients were available for recall after seven years (66.6%), and 25 RC and 26 RMGI restorations out of 70 restorations were evaluated. Excellent agreement was registered for all criteria between examiners (κ≥0.85). Alfa and bravo scores were classified as clinically acceptable. The McNemar test detected significant differences within RC restorations between baseline and seven-year evaluations for anatomic form, marginal integrity, and retention (p&lt;0.05). For RMGI restorations, a significant difference was identified for marginal integrity (p&lt;0.05). As to material comparison, the Fisher exact showed a better retention performance for RMGI restorations than for RC restorations (p&lt;0.05). Twelve composite restorations were dislodged (52.0% retention) and three ionomer restorations were lost (88.5% retention). The cumulative success rate for RC and RMGI was 30% and 58.1%, respectively. Conclusions After seven years of service, the clinical performance of RMGI restorations was superior to that of the adhesive system/resin composite restorations in this study.


2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 523-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Reis ◽  
A. D. Loguercio

Clinical Relevance After 24 months of evaluation, the use of Filtek Flow as a liner under Filtek Z250 restorations did not improve the clinical performance of Class V restorations.


2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 634-640 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Yu ◽  
Q. Li ◽  
T. Attin ◽  
Y. Wang

Clinical Relevance Carbamide peroxide treatment increased the microleakage of Class V conventional glass-ionomer cement and resin modified glass-ionomer cement restorations. The resin coating is an effective method to avoid bleaching-induced microleakage without affecting the bleaching outcome.


2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zeinab M. Zaki ◽  
Maha A. Niazy ◽  
Mohamed H. Zaazou ◽  
Shaymaa M. Nagi ◽  
Dina W. Elkassas

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to compare the clinical performance of Nano-hydroxyapatite-modified conventional glass ionomer cement (NHA-GIC) and Nano-hydroxyapatite-modified resin-modified glass ionomer cement (NHA-RMGIC) with conventional glass ionomer (CGIC) and resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGIC) in the treatment of caries class V cavities. Sixty patients with at least two cervical caries lesions participated in this study. A total of 120 class V cavities were prepared and then restored using different restorative materials. Restorations were clinically evaluated according to modified United States Public Health Service criteria at baseline and after 3, 6 and 9 months. Results There was no statistically significant difference in the clinical performance of the different restorative materials at any of the follow-up periods. However, throughout the study period there was a statistically significant change in the color match, surface texture and marginal integrity in NHA-GIC. A statistically significant change in the surface texture and marginal integrity was found in GIC. On the other hand, there was only a statistically significant change in surface texture in NHA-RMGIC. Conclusions All tested restorative materials, control (CGIC and RMGIC) as well as experimental (NHA-GIC and NHA-RMGIC), exhibited comparable clinical performance after 9 months follow-up.


2011 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
PCP Sampaio ◽  
AA de Almeida Júnior ◽  
LF Francisconi ◽  
LC Casas-Apayco ◽  
JC Pereira ◽  
...  

Clinical Relevance The long-term quality of a dentin adhesive interface appears to be maintained when a resin-modified glass-ionomer liner is used.


2011 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 413-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
F El-Askary ◽  
M Nassif

Clinical Relevance A “sandwich technique” restoration using nano-filled RMGI/resin composite can be achieved in one clinical bonding step using the self-etch adhesives.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document