A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelfagfællebedømt

Standard

A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity. / van Dijken, Jan W.V.; Pallesen, Ulla; Benetti, Ana.

I: Dental Materials, Bind 35, Nr. 2, 2019, s. 335-343.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelfagfællebedømt

Harvard

van Dijken, JWV, Pallesen, U & Benetti, A 2019, 'A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity', Dental Materials, bind 35, nr. 2, s. 335-343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.11.027

APA

van Dijken, J. W. V., Pallesen, U., & Benetti, A. (2019). A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity. Dental Materials, 35(2), 335-343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.11.027

Vancouver

van Dijken JWV, Pallesen U, Benetti A. A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity. Dental Materials. 2019;35(2):335-343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.11.027

Author

van Dijken, Jan W.V. ; Pallesen, Ulla ; Benetti, Ana. / A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity. I: Dental Materials. 2019 ; Bind 35, Nr. 2. s. 335-343.

Bibtex

@article{612e44b68ef94785bbc504ab8646fb73,
title = "A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: The objective of this randomized controlled prospective clinical trial was to evaluate the short time clinical behaviour of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC), which is claimed to possess bioactivity, in posterior restorations and to compare it intraindividually with a nanofilled resin composite.METHODS: Totally 78 pairs Class II and 4 pairs Class I restorations were placed in 29 female and 38 male participants with a mean age of 58.3 years (range 37-86). Each patient received at random at least one pair of, as similar as possible, Class II or Class I restorations. In the first cavity of each pair, the modified flowable RMGIC (ACTIVA Bioactive; AB) was placed after phosphoric acid etching of the cavity and without adhesive, according to the instructions of the manufacturer. In the other cavity a well established nanofilled resin composite (CeramX; RC) with a single step self-etch adhesive (Xeno Select) was placed. The restorations were evaluated using slightly modified USPHS criteria at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Caries risk and parafunctional habits of the participants were estimated.RESULTS: 158 restorations, 8 Class I and 150 Class II, were evaluated at the one year recalls. At baseline two failed restorations were observed (2AB), at 6 months six failures (5AB, 1RC) and at 12 months another thirteen failed restorations were observed (12AB, 1RC). This resulted in annual failure rates of 24.1% for the AB and 2.5% for RC (p<0.0001). The main reasons for failure for AB were lost restorations (5), postoperative symptoms (4) and secondary caries (3). Do to the unacceptable very high one-year failure frequency, the clinical study was stopped and no further evaluation will be performed.SIGNIFICANCE: The use of the AB restorative in Class II cavities, applied as instructed by the manufacturer after a short phosphoric acid pretreatment but without adhesive system, resulted in a non-acceptable very high failure frequency after a one year period. Further studies should be conducted using a bonding agent.",
author = "{van Dijken}, {Jan W.V.} and Ulla Pallesen and Ana Benetti",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2018 The Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1016/j.dental.2018.11.027",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "335--343",
journal = "Dental Materials",
issn = "0109-5641",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity

AU - van Dijken, Jan W.V.

AU - Pallesen, Ulla

AU - Benetti, Ana

N1 - Copyright © 2018 The Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - OBJECTIVE: The objective of this randomized controlled prospective clinical trial was to evaluate the short time clinical behaviour of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC), which is claimed to possess bioactivity, in posterior restorations and to compare it intraindividually with a nanofilled resin composite.METHODS: Totally 78 pairs Class II and 4 pairs Class I restorations were placed in 29 female and 38 male participants with a mean age of 58.3 years (range 37-86). Each patient received at random at least one pair of, as similar as possible, Class II or Class I restorations. In the first cavity of each pair, the modified flowable RMGIC (ACTIVA Bioactive; AB) was placed after phosphoric acid etching of the cavity and without adhesive, according to the instructions of the manufacturer. In the other cavity a well established nanofilled resin composite (CeramX; RC) with a single step self-etch adhesive (Xeno Select) was placed. The restorations were evaluated using slightly modified USPHS criteria at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Caries risk and parafunctional habits of the participants were estimated.RESULTS: 158 restorations, 8 Class I and 150 Class II, were evaluated at the one year recalls. At baseline two failed restorations were observed (2AB), at 6 months six failures (5AB, 1RC) and at 12 months another thirteen failed restorations were observed (12AB, 1RC). This resulted in annual failure rates of 24.1% for the AB and 2.5% for RC (p<0.0001). The main reasons for failure for AB were lost restorations (5), postoperative symptoms (4) and secondary caries (3). Do to the unacceptable very high one-year failure frequency, the clinical study was stopped and no further evaluation will be performed.SIGNIFICANCE: The use of the AB restorative in Class II cavities, applied as instructed by the manufacturer after a short phosphoric acid pretreatment but without adhesive system, resulted in a non-acceptable very high failure frequency after a one year period. Further studies should be conducted using a bonding agent.

AB - OBJECTIVE: The objective of this randomized controlled prospective clinical trial was to evaluate the short time clinical behaviour of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC), which is claimed to possess bioactivity, in posterior restorations and to compare it intraindividually with a nanofilled resin composite.METHODS: Totally 78 pairs Class II and 4 pairs Class I restorations were placed in 29 female and 38 male participants with a mean age of 58.3 years (range 37-86). Each patient received at random at least one pair of, as similar as possible, Class II or Class I restorations. In the first cavity of each pair, the modified flowable RMGIC (ACTIVA Bioactive; AB) was placed after phosphoric acid etching of the cavity and without adhesive, according to the instructions of the manufacturer. In the other cavity a well established nanofilled resin composite (CeramX; RC) with a single step self-etch adhesive (Xeno Select) was placed. The restorations were evaluated using slightly modified USPHS criteria at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Caries risk and parafunctional habits of the participants were estimated.RESULTS: 158 restorations, 8 Class I and 150 Class II, were evaluated at the one year recalls. At baseline two failed restorations were observed (2AB), at 6 months six failures (5AB, 1RC) and at 12 months another thirteen failed restorations were observed (12AB, 1RC). This resulted in annual failure rates of 24.1% for the AB and 2.5% for RC (p<0.0001). The main reasons for failure for AB were lost restorations (5), postoperative symptoms (4) and secondary caries (3). Do to the unacceptable very high one-year failure frequency, the clinical study was stopped and no further evaluation will be performed.SIGNIFICANCE: The use of the AB restorative in Class II cavities, applied as instructed by the manufacturer after a short phosphoric acid pretreatment but without adhesive system, resulted in a non-acceptable very high failure frequency after a one year period. Further studies should be conducted using a bonding agent.

U2 - 10.1016/j.dental.2018.11.027

DO - 10.1016/j.dental.2018.11.027

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 30527586

VL - 35

SP - 335

EP - 343

JO - Dental Materials

JF - Dental Materials

SN - 0109-5641

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 210106526