Abstract

BackgroundGlass ionomer cements (GIC) have been considered the top option to restore primary teeth by dentists. The most common supply forms are hand mixed and encapsulated GIC. There is a lack of information about the impact of different GIC supply forms on restoration survival.MethodsThis randomized clinical trial compared the survival rate of occlusal and occlusoproximal restorations in primary molars using two glass ionomer cements versions: hand-mixed (H/M) and encapsulated (ENC) after 24 months. Children aged 3–10 years who presented dentin caries lesions in primary molars were selected at School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Brazil. They were randomly assigned to groups: H /M (Fuji IX®, GC Europe) or ENC (Equia Fill®, GC Europe). The occurrence of restoration failure was evaluated by two blinded and calibrated examiners. The analyses were performed in Stata 13 (StataCorp, USA). To evaluate the primary outcome (restoration survival), we performed a survival analysis. Additionally an intention to treat (ITT) analysis were done at 24 months of follow-up. Cox Regression with shared frailty was performed to assess association between restoration failure and independent variables (α = 5%).ResultsA total of 324 restorations were performed in 145 children. The survival for H/M group was 58.2% and 60.1% for ENC, with no difference (p = 0.738). Occlusoproximal restorations had lower survival rate when compared to occlusal ones (HR = 3.83; p < 0.001).ConclusionsThe survival rate in primary molars is not influenced by the different supply forms of GIC. Also, occlusoproximal restorations present reduced performances when compared to occlusal cavities.Trial RegistrationThis randomized clinical trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.Gov on 10/15/2014 under protocol (NCT 02274142).

Highlights

  • Glass ionomer cements (GIC) have been considered the top option to restore primary teeth by dentists

  • Several studies show that GIC restorations have good clinical results both in primary and permanent dentition mainly focused on Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) [5,6,7]

  • This article was reported according to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trial) [17] guidelines, and the checklist is available as a supplementary file

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Glass ionomer cements (GIC) have been considered the top option to restore primary teeth by dentists [1]. Their properties as chemical bonding to enamel and dentin, fluoride release and uptake, thermal expansion coefficient similar to the tooth, and lower sensitivity to humidity than the composite resin (CR) [2,3,4] favor their. The most common presentation is the hand-mixed GICs (H/M) [5, 7,8,9,10], which require correct dispensing and mixing as specified by the manufacturer This GIC allow changing the powder-liquid ratio, making it more or less fluid, according to the professional’s preference. Incorrect hand-mixing of a GIC could lead to air incorporation into the material matrix and have an impact on the material properties [14, 15]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call