Cargando…

Clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, flowable composite, and polyacid-modified resin composite in noncarious cervical lesions: One-year follow-up

BACKGROUND: The restoration of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) often poses a challenge to the clinician. Various restorative materials are available in the market for the restoration of the same. Each material has various advantages and shortcomings. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hussainy, Syed Nazia, Nasim, Iffat, Thomas, Toby, Ranjan, Manish
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6161514/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30294112
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_51_18
_version_ 1783359004142993408
author Hussainy, Syed Nazia
Nasim, Iffat
Thomas, Toby
Ranjan, Manish
author_facet Hussainy, Syed Nazia
Nasim, Iffat
Thomas, Toby
Ranjan, Manish
author_sort Hussainy, Syed Nazia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The restoration of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) often poses a challenge to the clinician. Various restorative materials are available in the market for the restoration of the same. Each material has various advantages and shortcomings. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare and to evaluate the clinical performance of capsulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), flowable composite, and polyacid-modified composite resin (PMCR) in NCCLs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 101 restorations were placed among healthy controls in this clinical trial. A total of 101 restorations were divided into three groups with n = minimum 32 per group (Group 1: 33 restorations, Group 2: 34 restorations, and Group 3: 34 restorations). The restorative materials used were capsulated RMGIC, flowable composite and PMCR. After the placement, the restorations were evaluated for the United States Public Health Services criteria for six parameters, namely retention, marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, color stability, surface roughness, and sensitivity. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6 and 12 months. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statistics was performed using SPSS 21.0 version. Chi-square test was done to compare the proportions between groups. Fisher's exact test was used to compare proportion change between time points. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference seen among the three groups for retention, color stability, surface roughness, and hypersensitivity. RMGIC had shown superior characteristics in marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration compared to flowable composite and PMCR, and the difference was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, all the three restorative materials are clinically acceptable for the restoration of NCCLs. RMGIC is superior regarding marginal adaptation and esthetics for restoring NCCLs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6161514
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61615142018-10-05 Clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, flowable composite, and polyacid-modified resin composite in noncarious cervical lesions: One-year follow-up Hussainy, Syed Nazia Nasim, Iffat Thomas, Toby Ranjan, Manish J Conserv Dent Original Article BACKGROUND: The restoration of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) often poses a challenge to the clinician. Various restorative materials are available in the market for the restoration of the same. Each material has various advantages and shortcomings. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare and to evaluate the clinical performance of capsulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), flowable composite, and polyacid-modified composite resin (PMCR) in NCCLs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 101 restorations were placed among healthy controls in this clinical trial. A total of 101 restorations were divided into three groups with n = minimum 32 per group (Group 1: 33 restorations, Group 2: 34 restorations, and Group 3: 34 restorations). The restorative materials used were capsulated RMGIC, flowable composite and PMCR. After the placement, the restorations were evaluated for the United States Public Health Services criteria for six parameters, namely retention, marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, color stability, surface roughness, and sensitivity. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6 and 12 months. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statistics was performed using SPSS 21.0 version. Chi-square test was done to compare the proportions between groups. Fisher's exact test was used to compare proportion change between time points. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference seen among the three groups for retention, color stability, surface roughness, and hypersensitivity. RMGIC had shown superior characteristics in marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration compared to flowable composite and PMCR, and the difference was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, all the three restorative materials are clinically acceptable for the restoration of NCCLs. RMGIC is superior regarding marginal adaptation and esthetics for restoring NCCLs. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6161514/ /pubmed/30294112 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_51_18 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Hussainy, Syed Nazia
Nasim, Iffat
Thomas, Toby
Ranjan, Manish
Clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, flowable composite, and polyacid-modified resin composite in noncarious cervical lesions: One-year follow-up
title Clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, flowable composite, and polyacid-modified resin composite in noncarious cervical lesions: One-year follow-up
title_full Clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, flowable composite, and polyacid-modified resin composite in noncarious cervical lesions: One-year follow-up
title_fullStr Clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, flowable composite, and polyacid-modified resin composite in noncarious cervical lesions: One-year follow-up
title_full_unstemmed Clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, flowable composite, and polyacid-modified resin composite in noncarious cervical lesions: One-year follow-up
title_short Clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, flowable composite, and polyacid-modified resin composite in noncarious cervical lesions: One-year follow-up
title_sort clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, flowable composite, and polyacid-modified resin composite in noncarious cervical lesions: one-year follow-up
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6161514/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30294112
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_51_18
work_keys_str_mv AT hussainysyednazia clinicalperformanceofresinmodifiedglassionomercementflowablecompositeandpolyacidmodifiedresincompositeinnoncariouscervicallesionsoneyearfollowup
AT nasimiffat clinicalperformanceofresinmodifiedglassionomercementflowablecompositeandpolyacidmodifiedresincompositeinnoncariouscervicallesionsoneyearfollowup
AT thomastoby clinicalperformanceofresinmodifiedglassionomercementflowablecompositeandpolyacidmodifiedresincompositeinnoncariouscervicallesionsoneyearfollowup
AT ranjanmanish clinicalperformanceofresinmodifiedglassionomercementflowablecompositeandpolyacidmodifiedresincompositeinnoncariouscervicallesionsoneyearfollowup