The preventive effect of glass ionomer cement restorations on secondary caries formation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Ge, Kelsey Xingyun; Quock, Ryan; Chu, Chun-Hung; Yu, Ollie Yiru

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2023.10.008

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 100 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All included studies are controlled clinical trials where the oral hygiene index of patients is moderate to good; therefore, the risk of cavities is low. Consequently, the risk of secondary caries formation in these patients was considered low, regardless of the material used, which is consistent with the results of other reviews [ 75 , 77 , 78 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Clinical Effectiveness of Ion-Releasing Restorations versus Composite Restorations in Dental Restorations: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Arbildo-Vega,

Cruzado-Oliva,

Coronel-Zubiate

et al. 2024

Dentistry Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: To compare the clinical effectiveness of ion-releasing restorations (IRR) vs. composite resin (CR) in dental restorations. Methods: A systematic search was carried out from articles published until January 2024, in the biomedical databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scielo, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Randomized clinical trials were included, with a follow-up time greater than or equal to 1 year, without time and language limits and which reported the clinical effect of IRR compared to CR in dental restorations. The RoB 2.0 tool was used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies and the GRADEPro GDT tool was used to assess the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendation of the results. Results: The search yielded a total of 1109 articles. After excluding those that did not meet the selection criteria, 29 articles remained for the quantitative synthesis. The analysis found no statistically significant difference when comparing the dental restorations with IRRs or CRs. Conclusion: The literature reviewed suggests that there are no differences between the IRRs and CRs in dental restorations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Clinical Effectiveness of Ion-Releasing Restorations versus Composite Restorations in Dental Restorations: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Arbildo-Vega,

Cruzado-Oliva,

Coronel-Zubiate

et al. 2024

Dentistry Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It should be mentioned that the minimum requirement for fluoride release to promote clinical benefits for caries management from the ISO standard for GICs has not been established. It was, however, suggested that fluoride at a concentration of 0.03–0.7 ppm could inhibit mineral loss and enhance remineralization in dentin [ 10 ]. This may be associated with the reduction of S. mutans and inhibits the bacteria from metabolizing carbohydrates [ 55 , 61 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…GICs were also reported to be a cost-effective restorative material [ 6 – 9 ]. The attractive properties of GICs include fluoride release, self-adhesion, and preventive effects on secondary caries by releasing multiple ions such as fluoride, strontium, and phosphate [ 10 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of setting kinetics, mechanical strength, ion release, and cytotoxicity of high-strength glass ionomer cement contained elastomeric micelles

Leenutaphong,

Phantumvanit,

Young

et al. 2024

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Low mechanical properties are the main limitation of glass ionomer cements (GICs). The incorporation of elastomeric micelles is expected to enhance the strength of GICs without detrimentally affecting their physical properties and biocompatibility. This study compared the chemical and mechanical properties, as well as the cytotoxicity, of elastomeric micelles-containing glass ionomer cement (DeltaFil, DT) with commonly used materials, including EQUIA Forte Fil (EF), Fuji IX GP Extra (F9), and Ketac Molar (KT). Method Powder particles of GICs were examined with SEM-EDX. Setting kinetics were assessed using ATR-FTIR. Biaxial flexural strength/modulus and Vickers surface microhardness were measured after immersion in water for 24 h and 4 weeks. The release of F, Al, Sr, and P in water over 8 weeks was analyzed using a fluoride-specific electrode and ICP-OES. The toxicity of the material extract on mouse fibroblasts was also evaluated. Results High fluoride levels in the powder were detected with EF and F9. DT demonstrated an initial delay followed by a faster acid reaction compared to other cements, suggesting an improved snap set. DT also exhibited superior flexural strength than other materials at both 24 h and 4 weeks but lower surface microhardness (p < 0.05). EF and F9 showed higher release of F, Al, and P than DT and KT. There was no statistically significant difference in fibroblast viability among the tested materials (p > 0.05). Conclusions Elastomeric micelles-containing glass ionomer cement (DT) exhibited satisfactory mechanical properties and cytocompatibility compared with other materials. DT could, therefore, potentially be considered an alternative high-strength GIC for load-bearing restorations.

show abstract

Prevention of secondary caries using fluoride-loaded chitosan nanoparticle-modified glass-ionomer cement

Altınışık,

Erten Can,

Mutlu Ağardan

et al. 2024

Clin Oral Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The preventive effect of glass ionomer cement restorations on secondary caries formation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cited by 6 publications

References 100 publications

Clinical Effectiveness of Ion-Releasing Restorations versus Composite Restorations in Dental Restorations: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Clinical Effectiveness of Ion-Releasing Restorations versus Composite Restorations in Dental Restorations: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Evaluation of setting kinetics, mechanical strength, ion release, and cytotoxicity of high-strength glass ionomer cement contained elastomeric micelles

Prevention of secondary caries using fluoride-loaded chitosan nanoparticle-modified glass-ionomer cement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About