Cargando…

Clinical evaluation of a new art material: Nanoparticulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement

CONTEXT: The success of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique depends on the restorative material; hence, clinical studies with various materials are necessary. AIM: The aim of the present study was to clinically evaluate and compare the nanoionomer and high-viscosity glass ionomer using...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Konde, S., Raj, S., Jaiswal, D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3894086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24478966
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2231-0762.109361
_version_ 1782299797314600960
author Konde, S.
Raj, S.
Jaiswal, D.
author_facet Konde, S.
Raj, S.
Jaiswal, D.
author_sort Konde, S.
collection PubMed
description CONTEXT: The success of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique depends on the restorative material; hence, clinical studies with various materials are necessary. AIM: The aim of the present study was to clinically evaluate and compare the nanoionomer and high-viscosity glass ionomer using United States Public Health Services (USPHS) Modified Cvar/Ryge Criteria with ART approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two primary molars in 50 healthy children aged between 5 and 8 years were selected for the study. The teeth were treated with ART and divided into two groups. The group 1 teeth were restored with nanoionomer (Ketac Nano 100 3M ESPE) and group 2 with high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (HVGIC), (Fuji IX GC). Each restoration was evaluated using the USPHS Modified Cvar/Ryge Criteria at baseline and 6 months’ and 12 months’ time interval. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Chi-squared (χ(2)) test. RESULTS: Nanoionomer was significantly better than HVGIC with respect to color match at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months (P<0.001). Nanoionomers were also significantly better than HVGIC in case of cavosurface marginal discoloration and marginal adaptation (P<0.001) at 6 months and 12 months. There was no significant difference between the two materials with respect to secondary caries at 6 months (P>0.05), but at 12 months, nanoionomer was statistically better than HVGIC (P<0.05). There was no statistical significant difference with respect to anatomical form and postoperative sensitivity (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: The results indicate that nanoionomer can be a successful alternative restorative material for use with ART technique.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3894086
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38940862014-01-29 Clinical evaluation of a new art material: Nanoparticulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement Konde, S. Raj, S. Jaiswal, D. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent Original Article CONTEXT: The success of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique depends on the restorative material; hence, clinical studies with various materials are necessary. AIM: The aim of the present study was to clinically evaluate and compare the nanoionomer and high-viscosity glass ionomer using United States Public Health Services (USPHS) Modified Cvar/Ryge Criteria with ART approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two primary molars in 50 healthy children aged between 5 and 8 years were selected for the study. The teeth were treated with ART and divided into two groups. The group 1 teeth were restored with nanoionomer (Ketac Nano 100 3M ESPE) and group 2 with high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (HVGIC), (Fuji IX GC). Each restoration was evaluated using the USPHS Modified Cvar/Ryge Criteria at baseline and 6 months’ and 12 months’ time interval. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Chi-squared (χ(2)) test. RESULTS: Nanoionomer was significantly better than HVGIC with respect to color match at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months (P<0.001). Nanoionomers were also significantly better than HVGIC in case of cavosurface marginal discoloration and marginal adaptation (P<0.001) at 6 months and 12 months. There was no significant difference between the two materials with respect to secondary caries at 6 months (P>0.05), but at 12 months, nanoionomer was statistically better than HVGIC (P<0.05). There was no statistical significant difference with respect to anatomical form and postoperative sensitivity (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: The results indicate that nanoionomer can be a successful alternative restorative material for use with ART technique. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3894086/ /pubmed/24478966 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2231-0762.109361 Text en Copyright: © Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Konde, S.
Raj, S.
Jaiswal, D.
Clinical evaluation of a new art material: Nanoparticulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement
title Clinical evaluation of a new art material: Nanoparticulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement
title_full Clinical evaluation of a new art material: Nanoparticulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement
title_fullStr Clinical evaluation of a new art material: Nanoparticulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement
title_full_unstemmed Clinical evaluation of a new art material: Nanoparticulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement
title_short Clinical evaluation of a new art material: Nanoparticulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement
title_sort clinical evaluation of a new art material: nanoparticulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3894086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24478966
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2231-0762.109361
work_keys_str_mv AT kondes clinicalevaluationofanewartmaterialnanoparticulatedresinmodifiedglassionomercement
AT rajs clinicalevaluationofanewartmaterialnanoparticulatedresinmodifiedglassionomercement
AT jaiswald clinicalevaluationofanewartmaterialnanoparticulatedresinmodifiedglassionomercement