Long-term clinical performance  of experimental glass-ionomer cement with the bi-functional fluid

Objectives: The present preliminary study evaluated the clinical and radiographic performances of heat-cured high viscosity glass ionomer (HCHVGI) in class II restorations of primary molars. Study design: A retrospective study on a cohort of patients who had dental caries restored at a private practice was conducted. Restorations were evaluated radiographically and photographically by two separate examiners. Results: Ninety-three Class II restorations in 44 patients (average age: 108 months ± 25.3, 24 males, 20 females) were examined. Average recall time was 22.2 months ± 4.2. All but three restorations (96.8%) were present and intact, with no incidents of secondary caries. Three additional restorations had occlusal defects that required retreatment, resulting in an overall success rate of 93.5%. Ninety-seven percent of the restorations were rated optimal for marginal integrity with no staining of the restoration surfaces. No patients complained of post-operative sensitivity. The most common flaw found was a concavity on the proximal wall of the cavity box (27%, mean age 16 months ± 3.9). Conclusion: The findings in this preliminary study suggest that heat cured high viscosity glass ionomer cement may be an effective restorative material for Class II restorations in primary molars that are a year or two from shedding.

Download Full-text

Long-term results of amalgam versus glass ionomer cement as apical sealant after apicectomy

Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology Oral Radiology and Endodontology ◽

10.1016/s1079-2104(05)80082-4 ◽

1995 ◽

Vol 79 (1) ◽

pp. 101-103 ◽

Cited By ~ 93

Author(s):

Per Jesslén ◽

Lars Zetterqvist ◽

Anders Heimdahl

Keyword(s):

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Long Term Results ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Ionomer Cement

Download Full-text

The effect of dentine conditioning with polyacrylic acid on the clinical performance of glass ionomer cement - 3-year results

Australian Dental Journal ◽

10.1111/j.1834-7819.1994.tb04780.x ◽

1994 ◽

Vol 39 (4) ◽

pp. 220-221 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Martin J. Tyas

Keyword(s):

Polyacrylic Acid ◽

Clinical Performance ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Ionomer Cement

Download Full-text

A Short Study on the Experimental Glass-Ionomer Cement Containing P2O5

Phosphorus Sulfur and Silicon and the Related Elements ◽

10.1080/10426507.2013.789876 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 189 (1) ◽

pp. 74-80

Author(s):

Fatemeh Mirghaderi ◽

Ahmad Monshi ◽

Masoud Kasiri ◽

Ali Doostmohammadi ◽

Masoomeh Khaghani

Keyword(s):

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Experimental Glass ◽

Ionomer Cement

Download Full-text

Effect of incorporation of nano-hydroxyapatite particles on the clinical performance of conventional and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in class V cavities: split-mouth, randomized controlled trial

Bulletin of the National Research Centre ◽

10.1186/s42269-021-00655-2 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 45 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Zeinab M. Zaki ◽

Maha A. Niazy ◽

Mohamed H. Zaazou ◽

Shaymaa M. Nagi ◽

Dina W. Elkassas

Keyword(s):

Surface Texture ◽

Clinical Performance ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Class V ◽

Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽

Restorative Materials ◽

Significant Change ◽

Ionomer Cement

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.

Download Full-text