Long-term clinical comparison of a resin-based composite and resin modified glass ionomer in the treatment of cervical caries lesions.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Odontology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-05 DOI:10.1007/s10266-024-00958-6
Uzay Koç-Vural, Leyla Kerimova-Köse, Arlin Kiremitci
{"title":"Long-term clinical comparison of a resin-based composite and resin modified glass ionomer in the treatment of cervical caries lesions.","authors":"Uzay Koç-Vural, Leyla Kerimova-Köse, Arlin Kiremitci","doi":"10.1007/s10266-024-00958-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This 72-month study compared the clinical effectiveness of a resin-based composite (RBC) (Spectrum TPH3, Dentsply Sirona) with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) (Riva Light Cure, SDI) in restoring cervical caries lesions (CCLs). Thirty-three patients, each with at least two CCLs, were enrolled. After caries removal, the dimensions of the cavities were recorded. In a split-mouth study design, a total of 110 restorations were randomly placed. Fifty-five restorations were placed with RBC using an etch-and-rinse adhesive system (Prime&Bond NT, Dentsply Sirona), while the remaining 55 were restored with RMGIC. The restorations were assessed at baseline, 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 60, and 72 months according to modified USPHS criteria. Statistical analysis included Pearson Chi-square, Friedman tests, Kaplan Meier, and Logistic Regression analysis (p < 0.05). After 72 months, 47 restorations in 19 patients were evaluated (55% follow-up rate). Seventy-five percent of the RBC (n = 26) and 74% (n = 21) of the RMGIC restorations were fully retained. There were no significant differences between materials regarding retention and marginal adaptation (p > 0.05). Cavity dimensions, caries activity, and retention exhibited no correlation (p > 0.05). The increase in marginal staining in both groups over time was significant (p < 0.001). RMGIC restorations exhibited higher discoloration than RBC restorations (p = 0.014). At 72 months, three secondary caries lesions were detected in both restoration groups: two RMGIC and one RBC. There were no reports of sensitivity. After 72 months, both RBC and RMGIC restorations were clinically successful, with similar retention and marginal adaptation scores. However, it is noteworthy that RMGIC restorations tend to discoloration over time compared to RBC. The trial is registered in the database of \"Clinical Trials\". The registration number is NCT0372-2758, October 29, 2018.</p>","PeriodicalId":19390,"journal":{"name":"Odontology","volume":" ","pages":"404-415"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Odontology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-024-00958-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This 72-month study compared the clinical effectiveness of a resin-based composite (RBC) (Spectrum TPH3, Dentsply Sirona) with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) (Riva Light Cure, SDI) in restoring cervical caries lesions (CCLs). Thirty-three patients, each with at least two CCLs, were enrolled. After caries removal, the dimensions of the cavities were recorded. In a split-mouth study design, a total of 110 restorations were randomly placed. Fifty-five restorations were placed with RBC using an etch-and-rinse adhesive system (Prime&Bond NT, Dentsply Sirona), while the remaining 55 were restored with RMGIC. The restorations were assessed at baseline, 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 60, and 72 months according to modified USPHS criteria. Statistical analysis included Pearson Chi-square, Friedman tests, Kaplan Meier, and Logistic Regression analysis (p < 0.05). After 72 months, 47 restorations in 19 patients were evaluated (55% follow-up rate). Seventy-five percent of the RBC (n = 26) and 74% (n = 21) of the RMGIC restorations were fully retained. There were no significant differences between materials regarding retention and marginal adaptation (p > 0.05). Cavity dimensions, caries activity, and retention exhibited no correlation (p > 0.05). The increase in marginal staining in both groups over time was significant (p < 0.001). RMGIC restorations exhibited higher discoloration than RBC restorations (p = 0.014). At 72 months, three secondary caries lesions were detected in both restoration groups: two RMGIC and one RBC. There were no reports of sensitivity. After 72 months, both RBC and RMGIC restorations were clinically successful, with similar retention and marginal adaptation scores. However, it is noteworthy that RMGIC restorations tend to discoloration over time compared to RBC. The trial is registered in the database of "Clinical Trials". The registration number is NCT0372-2758, October 29, 2018.

Abstract Image

树脂基复合材料和树脂改性玻璃离聚体在治疗牙颈部龋损方面的长期临床比较。
这项为期 72 个月的研究比较了树脂基复合材料(RBC)(Spectrum TPH3,Dentsply Sirona 公司)和树脂改性玻璃离子粘结剂(RMGIC)(Riva Light Cure,SDI 公司)在修复颈椎龋损(CCL)方面的临床效果。共有 33 名患者入选,每名患者至少有两个 CCL。龋齿去除后,记录龋洞的尺寸。在分口研究设计中,共随机植入了 110 个修复体。其中 55 个使用 RBC 修复体,使用蚀刻-冲洗粘接系统(Prime&Bond NT,Dentsply Sirona 公司),其余 55 个使用 RMGIC 修复体。根据修改后的 USPHS 标准,在基线、6、12、18、24、36、60 和 72 个月时对修复体进行评估。统计分析包括 Pearson Chi-square、Friedman 检验、Kaplan Meier 和 Logistic 回归分析(P 0.05)。龋洞尺寸、龋坏活动度和保持率没有相关性(P > 0.05)。随着时间的推移,两组的边缘染色均有显著增加(p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Odontology
Odontology 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
4.00%
发文量
91
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal Odontology covers all disciplines involved in the fields of dentistry and craniofacial research, including molecular studies related to oral health and disease. Peer-reviewed articles cover topics ranging from research on human dental pulp, to comparisons of analgesics in surgery, to analysis of biofilm properties of dental plaque.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信