Resin-modified and conventional glass ionomer restorations in primary teeth: 8-year results

被引:37
|
作者
Qvist, V
Manscher, E
Teglers, PT
机构
[1] Univ Copenhagen, Sch Dent, Fac Hlth Sci, Dept Cariol & Endodont, DK-2200 Copenhagen, Denmark
[2] Publ Dent Hlth Serv, Gladsaxe, Denmark
[3] Univ Copenhagen, Sch Oral Hlth Care, Copenhagen, Denmark
关键词
clinical trial; cariostatic effects; dental restorations; glass ionomer cement; long-term behaviour; pedodontics; resin modified glass ionomer;
D O I
10.1016/j.jdent.2004.01.001
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives. To compare the longevity and cariostatic effects of resin-modified (RMGIC) and conventional glass ionomer (GIC) restorations in primary teeth in the Danish Public Dental Health Service. Methods. The sample consisted of 543 RMGIC and 451 GIC restorations in all cavity types in the primary teeth of 640 children, aged 3.0-17.5 years. The restorations were in contact with 480 unrestored surfaces. The restorations and the adjacent surfaces were followed until exfoliation/extraction of the teeth, repair/replacement of restorations or operative treatment of adjacent surfaces. Survival analyses supplied with multivariate analyses were performed to assess the influence of different factors on the longevity of restorations, occurrence of prevalent failures, and caries treatment of adjacent surfaces. Results. After 8 years, 2% of the restorations were still in function and 37% of the RMGIC and 44% of the GIC restorations had been repaired or replaced. Fracture and loss of retention predominated as the reasons for failure of restorations in both materials. The 50% survival time for restorations was 55 months for RMGIC and 48 months for GIC (p = 0.01). Progression of caries lesions required operative treatment on 20% of the surfaces in contact with RMGIC and on 14% of surfaces adjacent to GIC restorations. The 75% survival time was 35 months for surfaces in contact with both materials (p = 0.37). Conclusions. RMGIC and GIC showed similar cariostatic effects on restored teeth and adjacent tooth surfaces, but RMGIC should be preferred for class 11 restorations in the primary dentition, and class III/V restorations should be made in GIC due to enhanced longevity. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
下载
收藏
页码:285 / 294
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Differential bonds degradation of two resin-modified glass-ionomer cements in primary and permanent teeth
    Marquezan, Marcela
    Fagundes, Ticiane Cestari
    Toledano, Manuel
    de Lima Navarro, Maria Fidela
    Osorio, Raquel
    JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2009, 37 (11) : 857 - 864
  • [22] Three-year performance of a nano-filled resin-modified glass ionomer cement in class II primary molar restorations
    Dermata, A.
    Papageorgiou, S. N.
    Kotsanos, N.
    EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF PAEDIATRIC DENTISTRY, 2021, 22 (03) : 425 - 432
  • [23] An In Vitro Assessment of the Shear Bond Strength of Alkasite Restorative Material in Primary Molars Compared with Glass Ionomer and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Restorations
    Sulimany, Ayman M.
    Aldowsari, Mannaa K.
    Bin Saleh, Saad
    Alotaibi, Sarah S.
    Alhelal, Bushra M.
    Hamdan, Hebah M.
    Materials, 2024, 17 (24)
  • [24] Water storage effect on the marginal seal of resin-modified glass-ionomer restorations
    Irie, M
    Suzuki, K
    OPERATIVE DENTISTRY, 1999, 24 (05) : 272 - 278
  • [25] Three-year performance of a nano-filled resin-modified glass ionomer cement in class II primary molar restorations
    A. Dermata
    S. N. Papageorgiou
    N. Kotsanos
    European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry, 2021, 22 : 425 - 432
  • [26] MICROLEAKAGE OF CLASS V RESIN-MODIFIED GLASS IONOMER CEMENT AND COMPOMER RESTORATIONS IN VITRO
    丁玲
    陆忆
    陆群
    许琪华
    Medical Bulletin of Shanghai Jiaotong University, 2006, (02) : 99 - 103
  • [27] A 4-year clinical study on amalgam, resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement restorations in overdenture abutments
    Keltjens, HMAM
    Creugers, TJ
    van't Hof, MA
    Creugers, NHJ
    JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 1999, 27 (08) : 551 - 555
  • [28] The Effects of Surface Pretreatment on the Microleakage of Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement Restorations
    Bayrak, S.
    Sen Tune, E.
    Tuloglu, N.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY, 2012, 36 (03) : 279 - 284
  • [29] Clinical performance and caries inhibition of resin-modified - Glass ionomer cement and amalgam restorations
    Donly, KJ
    Segura, A
    Kanellis, M
    Erickson, RL
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION, 1999, 130 (10): : 1459 - 1466
  • [30] Effects of finishing/polishing techniques on microleakage of resin-modified glass ionomer cement restorations
    Yap, AUJ
    Yap, WY
    Yeo, EJC
    Tan, JWS
    Ong, DSB
    OPERATIVE DENTISTRY, 2003, 28 (01) : 36 - 41