Top

Clinical Oral Investigations

Published in:

01-03-2019 | Original Article

Three-year clinical evaluation of high-viscosity glass ionomer restorations in non-carious cervical lesions: a randomised controlled split-mouth clinical trial

Authors: Esra Uzer Celik, Ayse Tugce Tunac, Fatma Yilmaz

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 3/2019

Abstract

Objective

To compare the 3-year clinical performance of high-viscosity glass ionomer restorations with that of composite restorations in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs).

Materials and methods

One hundred thirty-four NCCLs were randomised into two groups according to a split-mouth design. In the experimental group (Hv-GIC), lesions were restored with a high-viscosity glass ionomer (EQUIA Fil, GC), whereas a composite resin (G-aenial, GC) was applied in the control group (E&Ra/comp). All restorative materials were used according to the manufacturers’ instructions. Clinical evaluations were performed after 1 week, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years using FDI (World Dental Federation) criteria. Data were analysed using Friedman’s ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U tests (α = 0.05).

Results

While retention rates of the Hv-GIC group were 98.5%, 96%, 91%, and 87% in respective evaluation periods, no retention loss was observed in the E&Ra/comp group at any time. There was a statistically significant difference between study groups regarding the retention criterion in both the second and third years (p = 0.008 and p = 0.003, respectively). Furthermore, there was a statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of surface lustre at the third-year recall, in favour of the E&Ra/comp group (p = 0.022).

Conclusions

The 3-year clinical performance of E&Ra/comp restorations in NCCLs was better than that of Hv-GIC restorations. The most common problems in Hv-GIC restorations were a loss of retention and reduction in surface lustre.

Clinical relevance

Although the 3-year clinical performance of Hv-GIC restorations in non-retentive lesions was acceptable, it was worse than in composites. The operator should consider the benefit/loss ratio of Hv-GIC when he/she decides to use this material in non-retentive cavities, especially those that are shallow.

Lyttle HA, Sidhu N, Smyth B (1998) A study of the classification and treatment of noncarious cervical lesions by general practitioners. J Prosthet Dent 79:342–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70248-3 CrossRefPubMed

Shira RB (1972) Pathology of dental hard tissues. JJ Pindborg, PhiladelphiaCrossRef

Bartlett DW, Shah P (2006) A critical review of non-carious cervical (wear) lesions and the role of abfraction, erosion and abrasion. J Dent Res 85:306–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910608500405 CrossRefPubMed

Huysmans MC, Chew HP, Ellwood RP (2011) Clinical studies of dental erosion and erosive wear. Caries Res 45(Suppl 1):60–68. https://doi.org/10.1159/000325947 CrossRefPubMed

Wiener RC, Wu B, Crout R, Wiener M, Plassmann B, Kao E, McNeil D (2010) Hyposalivation and xerostomia in dentate older patients. J Am Dent Assoc 141:279–284. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2010.0161 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

May S, Cieplik F, Hiller KA, Buchalla W, Federlin M, Schmalz G (2017) Flowable composites for restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: three-year results. Dent Mater 33:e136–e145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2016.12.009 CrossRefPubMed

Diem VT, Tyas MJ, Ngo HC, Phuong LH, Khanh ND (2014) The effect of a nano-filled resin coating on the 3-year clinical performance of a conventional high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement. Clin Oral Investig 18:753–759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-1026-z CrossRefPubMed

Friedl K, Hiller KA, Friedl KH (2011) Clinical performance of a new glass ionomer based restoration system: a retrospective cohort study. Dent Mater 27:1031–1037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.07.004 CrossRefPubMed

Benetti AR, Peutzfeldt A, Lussi A, Flury S (2014) Resin composites: modulus of elasticity and marginal quality. J Dent 42:1185–1192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.07.004 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Molina GF, Cabral RJ, Mazzola I, Lascano LB, Frencken JE (2013) Mechanical performance of encapsulated restorative glass-ionomer cements for use with atraumatic restorative treatment (ART). J Appl Oral Sci 21:243–249. https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-775720130129 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Heymann HO, Sturdevant JR, Bayne S, Wilder AD, Sluder TB, Brunson WD (1991) Examining tooth flexure effects on cervical restorations: a two-year clinical study. J Am Dent Assoc 122:41–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-8177(91)25015-1 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Pinto Gdos S, Oliveira LJ, Romano AR, Schardosim LR, Bonow ML, Pacce M, Correa MB, Demarco FF, Torriani DD (2014) Longevity of posterior restorations in primary teeth: results from a paediatric dental clinic. J Dent 42:1248–1254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.08.005 CrossRefPubMed

13.

Namgung C, Rho YJ, Jin BH, Lim BS, Cho BH (2013) A retrospective clinical study of cervical restorations: longevity and failure-prognostic variables. Oper Dent 38:376–385. https://doi.org/10.2341/11-416-C CrossRefPubMed

14.

Pindborg JJ (1970) Pathology of dental hard tissues. Munksgaard, Copenhagen

15.

Gurgan S, Kutuk ZB, Ergin E, Oztas SS, Cakir FY (2015) Four-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance of a glass ionomer restorative system. Oper Dent 40:134–143. https://doi.org/10.2341/13-239-C CrossRefPubMed

16.

Klinke T, Daboul A, Turek A, Frankenberger R, Hickel R, Biffar R (2016) Clinical performance during 48 months of two current glass ionomer restorative systems with coatings: a randomized clinical trial in the field. Trials 17:239. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1339-8 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Osborne-Smith K, Burke F, Wilson N (1999) The aetiology of the non-carious cervical lesion. Int Dent J 49:139–143. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1875-595X.1999.tb00898.x CrossRefPubMed

18.

Vaid DS, Shah NC, Bilgi PS (2015) One year comparative clinical evaluation of EQUIA with resin-modified glass ionomer and a nanohybrid composite in noncarious cervical lesions. J Conserv Dent 18:449–452. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.168805 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Van Meerbeek B, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G (1993) Evaluation of two dentin adhesives in cervical lesions. J Prosthet Dent 70:308–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(93)90213-8 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Gurgan S, Kutuk ZB, Ergin E, Oztas SS, Cakir FY (2017) Clinical performance of a glass ionomer restorative system: a 6-year evaluation. Clin Oral Investig 21:2335–2343. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(93)90213-8 CrossRefPubMed

21.

TürkünLS KÖ (2016) A prospective six-year clinical study evaluating reinforced glass ionomer cements with resin coating on posterior teeth: quo vadis? Oper Dent 41:587–598. https://doi.org/10.2341/15-331-C CrossRef

Title: Three-year clinical evaluation of high-viscosity glass ionomer restorations in non-carious cervical lesions: a randomised controlled split-mouth clinical trial
Authors: Esra Uzer Celik
Ayse Tugce Tunac
Fatma Yilmaz
Publication date: 01-03-2019
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2575-y

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Three-year clinical evaluation of high-viscosity glass ionomer restorations in non-carious cervical lesions: a randomised controlled split-mouth clinical trial

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Reproduction accuracy of articulator mounting with an arbitrary face-bow vs. average values—a controlled, randomized, blinded patient simulator study

A comparison of orofacial profiles in 5- and 10-year-old Swedish children with and without cleft lip and/or palate

Physical property investigation of contemporary glass ionomer and resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials

Longevity of composite build-ups without posts—10-year results of a practice-based study

Comparative differentiation analysis of distinct oral tissue-derived cells in response to osteogenic stimulation

The antimicrobial properties, cytotoxicity, and differentiation potential of double antibiotic intracanal medicaments loaded into hydrogel system