N V Ballal, P Jalan, N Rai, N Al-Haj Husain, M Özcan
{"title":"Evaluation of New Alkasite Based Restorative Material for Restoring Non- Carious Cervical Lesions- Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.","authors":"N V Ballal, P Jalan, N Rai, N Al-Haj Husain, M Özcan","doi":"10.1922/EJPRD_2410Ballal06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Two different restoration materials, an alkasite-based resin composite and a resinmodified glass ionomer cement were used to assess restoration of non-carious cervical dental lesions. This split mouth randomized controlled trial included 40 patients. After randomization both sides of the dental arch were restored with either an alkasite-based (Cention N, Ivoclar Vivadent) or a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Voco GmbH) restoration. The placed fillings were evaluated by blinded additional operators 1, 6 months and 1 year after to the USPHS criteria (retention, marginal integrity and discoloration, anatomical form and secondary caries). Data were analyzed using Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance test and Chi-square tests using SPSS software (SPSS Inc., Version 20) (P=0.05). As for retention and anatomic form both materials performed similar after one month. However, the retention and anatomic form for alkasite based restorative Cention showed significantly better results after 6 months (p=0.013/p=0.003) and one year (p=0.026/p=0.008). The resin modified glass ionomer restoration showed higher discoloration after 6 months (p=0.025) and one year (p=0.018), while Cention performed better regarding marginal integrity at all time intervals. No secondary caries occurred. Alkasite based restorative materials displayed superior technical, mechanical and aesthetical performance in a follow-up period of one year and can therefore be recommended as an alternative to resin-modified glass ionomer cements.</p>","PeriodicalId":45686,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_2410Ballal06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Two different restoration materials, an alkasite-based resin composite and a resinmodified glass ionomer cement were used to assess restoration of non-carious cervical dental lesions. This split mouth randomized controlled trial included 40 patients. After randomization both sides of the dental arch were restored with either an alkasite-based (Cention N, Ivoclar Vivadent) or a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Voco GmbH) restoration. The placed fillings were evaluated by blinded additional operators 1, 6 months and 1 year after to the USPHS criteria (retention, marginal integrity and discoloration, anatomical form and secondary caries). Data were analyzed using Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance test and Chi-square tests using SPSS software (SPSS Inc., Version 20) (P=0.05). As for retention and anatomic form both materials performed similar after one month. However, the retention and anatomic form for alkasite based restorative Cention showed significantly better results after 6 months (p=0.013/p=0.003) and one year (p=0.026/p=0.008). The resin modified glass ionomer restoration showed higher discoloration after 6 months (p=0.025) and one year (p=0.018), while Cention performed better regarding marginal integrity at all time intervals. No secondary caries occurred. Alkasite based restorative materials displayed superior technical, mechanical and aesthetical performance in a follow-up period of one year and can therefore be recommended as an alternative to resin-modified glass ionomer cements.
采用两种不同的修复材料,一种碱石基树脂复合材料和一种树脂改性玻璃离子水门铁来评估非龋齿宫颈病变的修复。该裂口随机对照试验包括40例患者。随机分组后,用碱石基(Cention N, Ivoclar Vivadent)或树脂改性玻璃离子水门合剂(Voco GmbH)修复牙弓两侧。放置的补料在1、6个月和1年后由盲法额外的操作员根据USPHS标准(固位、边缘完整性和变色、解剖形态和继发龋)进行评估。采用SPSS软件(SPSS Inc., Version 20)对数据进行肯德尔一致性系数检验和卡方检验(P=0.05)。一个月后,两种材料的固位和解剖形态相似。然而,在6个月(p=0.013/p=0.003)和1年(p=0.026/p=0.008)后,碱石基修复体的保留和解剖形态均有明显改善。树脂改性玻璃离聚体修复在6个月(p=0.025)和1年后(p=0.018)表现出较高的变色,而Cention在所有时间间隔的边缘完整性方面表现更好。无继发性龋齿发生。在一年的随访中,碱石基修复材料显示出优越的技术、机械和美学性能,因此可以推荐作为树脂改性玻璃离子水门合剂的替代品。
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry is published quarterly and includes clinical and research articles in subjects such as prosthodontics, operative dentistry, implantology, endodontics, periodontics and dental materials.