Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Oral Health
Published in: BMC Oral Health 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Are high-viscosity glass-ionomer cements inferior to silver amalgam as restorative materials for permanent posterior teeth? A Bayesian analysis

Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

To develop a synthesis within a Bayesian probability framework of previously established evidence, in order to derive an overall conclusion about the hypothesis (H1): ‘High-viscosity glass-ionomer cements (HVGIC) are inferior to silver amalgam as (load bearing) restorative materials for permanent posterior teeth’.

Methods

Following Bayesian method, the prior Odds that H1 is true (established from past uncontrolled clinical longitudinal and laboratory trials), the Likelihood Ratio incorporating new evidence (established from recent meta-epidemiological studies and systematic reviews of controlled clinical trials), as well as the posterior hypothesis Odds in view of the new evidence, were calculated.

Results

The prior Odds that HVGICs are clinically inferior to amalgam as restorative materials in posterior permanent teeth in relation to the hypothesis that this is not so was 1.12 to 1. The Likelihood Ratio based on new evidence in favor the hypothesis was zero and the subsequent posterior Odds 0 to 1. Therefore, based on the new evidence, the Odds that HVGICs are clinically inferior to amalgam as restorative materials in posterior permanent teeth degreased from 1.12 to zero.

Conclusion

The current evidence suggests lack of support for the hypothesis that high-viscosity glass-ionomer cements are inferior to silver amalgam as restorative materials for permanent posterior teeth. Should future research to this topic uphold the current findings, a wider range of clinical benefits for both patient and care provider, beyond appropriate restoration longevity for placing HVGIC based restorations may apply.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V. Direct contra naïve-indirect comparison of clinical failure rates between high-viscosity GIC and conventional amalgam restorations. An empirical study. PLoS One. 2013;8:e78397.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Frencken JE, Hof MA V 't, Van Amerongen WE, Holmgren CJ. Effectiveness of single-surface ART restorations in the permanent dentition: a meta-analysis. J Dent Res. 2004;83:120–3.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Yoshida Y, Van Meerbeek B, Nakayama Y, Snauwaert J, Hellemans L, Lambrechts P, et al. Evidence of chemical bonding at biomaterial-hard tissue interfaces. J Dent Res. 2000;79:709–71.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V, Leal SC, Oliveira LB, Bezerra AC, Bönecker M. Absence of carious lesions at margins of glass-ionomer and amalgam restorations: a meta- analysis. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2009;10:41–6.PubMed
5.
Ericson D, Kidd EAM, McComb D, Mjor I, Noack MJ. Minimally invasive dentistry – concept and techniques in cariology. Oral Health Prev Dent. 2003;1:59–72.PubMed
6.
Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V, Banerjee A. Atraumatic restorative treatment versus amalgam restoration longevity: a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig. 2010;14:233–40.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V. Failure rate of high-viscosity GIC based ART compared to that of conventional amalgam restorations - evidence from a systematic review update. S Afr Dent J. 2012;67:329–31.
8.
Wang X, Nie J, Cai X, Yengopal V, Mickenautsch S. Failure rate of atraumatic restorative treatment using high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement compared to conventional amalgam restorative treatment in primary and permanent teeth: a systematic review of Chinese trials. J Minim Interv Dent. 2012;5:377–415.
9.
Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V. Failure rate of atraumatic restorative treatment using high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement compared to conventional amalgam restorative treatment in primary and permanent teeth: a systematic review update - III. J Minim Interv Dent. 2012;5:273–331.
10.
Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V. Do laboratory results concerning high-viscosity glass ionomers versus amalgam for tooth restorations indicate similar effect direction and magnitude than that of controlled clinical trials? - A meta-epidemiological study. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0132246.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Manhart J, Chen H, Hamm G, Hickel R. Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Oper Dent. 2004;29:481–508.PubMed
12.
Ilie N, Hickel R, Valceanu AS, Huth KC. Fracture toughness of dental restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig. 2012;16:489–98.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Ilie N, Hickel R. Mechanical behavior of glass ionomer cements as a function of loading condition and mixing procedure. Dent Mater J. 2007;26:526–33.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Naasan MA, Watson TF. Conventional glass ionomers as posterior restorations. A status report for the American Journal of Dentistry. Am J Dent. 1998;11:36–45.PubMed
15.
Taifour D, Frencken JE, Beiruti N, van't Hof MA, Truin GJ, van Palenstein Helderman WH. Comparison between restorations in the permanent dentition produced by hand and rotary instrumentation--survival after 3 years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2003;31:122–8.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Pocock SJ. Clinical trials – A practical approach. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 1983; p. 125.
17.
Gelman A. Objections to Bayesian statistics. Bayes Analysis. 2008;3:445–50.CrossRef
18.
Jüni P, Holenstein F, Sterne J, Bartlett C, Egger M. Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study. Int J Epidemiol. 2002;31:115–23.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Moher D, Pham B, Klassen TP, Schulz KF, Berlin JA, Jadad AR, et al. What contributions do languages other than English make on the results of meta-analyses? J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:964–72.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Molina GF, Cabral RJ, Frencken JE. The ART approach: clinical aspects reviewed. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009;17(Suppl):89–98.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Rahimtoola S, van Amerongen E. Comparison of two tooth-saving preparation techniques for one-surface cavities. ASDC J Dent Child. 2002;69:16–26.PubMed
22.
Rahimtoola S, van Amerongen E, Maher R, Groen H. Pain related to different ways of minimal intervention in the treatment of small caries lesions. ASDC J Dent Child. 2000;67:123–7.PubMed
23.
Mickenautsch S, Frencken JE, van't HM. Atraumatic restorative treatment and dental anxiety in outpatients attending public oral health clinics in South Africa. J Public Health Dent. 2007;67:179–84.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Mickenautsch S, van't Hof MA, Frencken JE. Oral health service systems in Gauteng Province, South Africa. East Afr Med J. 2007;84:178–82.PubMed
25.
Estupiñán-Day S, Milner T, Tellez M. Oral health of low income children: procedures for atraumatic restorative treatment (PRAT) - Final report. PAHO. 2006; Project number 091024: ATN/JF-7025-RG.
26.
Mickenautsch S, Munshi I, Grossman ES. Comparative cost of ART and conventional treatment within a dental school clinic. S Afr Dent J. 2002;57:52–8.
27.
FDI World Dental Federation. FDI policy statement on dental amalgam and the Minamata Convention on Mercury: adopted by the FDI General Assembly: 13 September 2014, New Delhi, India. Int Dent J. 2014;64:295–6.CrossRef
28.
Metadata
Title
Are high-viscosity glass-ionomer cements inferior to silver amalgam as restorative materials for permanent posterior teeth? A Bayesian analysis
Publication date
01-12-2015
Published in
BMC Oral Health / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6831
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-015-0108-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Oral Health 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research article

Genotypic diversity and cariogenicity of Candida albicans from children with early childhood caries and caries-free children

Research article

Signs and symptoms associated with primary tooth eruption: a clinical trial of nonpharmacological remedies

Research article

Influence of orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances on enamel color: a systematic review

Research article

Canine retraction and anchorage loss self-ligating versus conventional brackets: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Study protocol

Effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of a single annual professional intervention for the prevention of childhood dental caries in a remote rural Indigenous community

Research article

The prevalence and pattern of deciduous molar hypomineralization and molar-incisor hypomineralization in children from a suburban population in Nigeria