Evaluation of Giomer Using Eighth Generation Bonding Agent and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement Restoration in Non-Carious Cervical Lesions.
Journal
Indian journal of dental research : official publication of Indian Society for Dental Research
ISSN: 1998-3603
Titre abrégé: Indian J Dent Res
Pays: India
ID NLM: 9202990
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Oct 2023
01 Oct 2023
Historique:
received:
20
01
2020
accepted:
16
08
2023
medline:
13
5
2024
pubmed:
13
5
2024
entrez:
13
5
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL) raise a considerable restorative challenge for the dentist in bonding, as adhesion is not as strong and predictable as enamel bonding. A critical factor for restorative success is the selection of restorative material. Clinicians have tried many restorative materials and techniques to obtain the best performance. The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare the clinical outcome of a Giomer and Resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) restoration in NCCL using united states public health service (USPHS) criteria at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. Patients from age 25 - 50 years having non-carious cervical lesions on both the sides and requiring restorations were screened. 20 patients were selected and further divided into 2 groups using simple random sampling technique. Group A- Beautifil II restoration using G-Premio bond (n = 10) and Group B- Ketac N100 restoration (n = 10). Restorations were done according to manufacturer's instructions and consequently evaluated at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months using the USPHS criteria for marginal discolouration, marginal integrity, surface texture, colour match, gross fracture and post-operative sensitivity. Giomer restorations showed better results than RMGIC. There was decrease in alpha ratings in both the study groups i.e., Giomer and RMGIC from 6 to 12 months. The overall findings suggest that both Giomer and RMGIC gave satisfactory clinical results when used to restore non-carious cervical lesions. Both the materials can successfully be used since there was no statistically significant difference in the clinical outcome.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38739810
doi: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_68_20
pii: 01363779-202334040-00002
doi:
Substances chimiques
Glass Ionomer Cements
0
Resin Cements
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Comparative Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
350-353Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 Copyright: © 2024 Indian Journal of Dental Research.
Références
Bader JD, McClure F, Scurria MS, Shugars DA, Heymann HO. Case-control study of non-carious cervical lesions. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1996;24:286-91.
Adeleke Oginni A. Clinical evaluation of resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions. J West Afr Coll Surg 2012;2:21–37.
Gladys S, Van Meerback, Lambrechts P, Vanberla G. Evaluation of esthetic parameters and a poly acid modified resin composite in class V cervical lesions. Quintessence Int 1999;30:607–44.
Coutinho E, Cardoso MV, De Munck J, Neves AA, Van Landuyt KL, Poitevin A, et al. , Bonding effectiveness and interfacial characterization of a nano filled resin-modified glass-ionomer. Dent Mater 2009;25:1347-57.
Tian F, Zhou L, Zhang Z, Niu L, Zhang L, Chen C, et al. , Paucity of nanolayering in resin-dentin interfaces of MDP-based adhesives. J Dent Res 2016;95:380–7.
Somani R, Jaidka S, Arora S. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of newer generation dentin bonding agents: An in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res 2016;27:86-90.
Nascimento MM, Dilbone DA, Pereira PN, Duarte WR, Geraldeli S, Delgado AJ. Abfraction Lesions: Etiology, diagnosis, and treatment options. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2016;8:79-87.
Mathias C, Ferraz L, Lima D, Marchi G. Treatment of non-carious lesions: Diagnosis, restorative materials and techniques. Braz J Oral Sci 2018;17:1-12.
Sarode G, Sarode S. Abfraction: A review. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol 2013;17:222-7.
Perdigão J, Dutra-Corrêa M, Saraceni S, Ciaramicoli M, Kiyan V. Randomized clinical trial of two resin-modified glass ionomer materials: 1-year results. Oper Dent 2012;37:591-601.
Hotwani K, Thosar N, Baliga S. Comparative in vitro assessment of color stability of hybrid esthetic restorative materials against various children’s beverages. Journal of Conservative Dentistry 2014;17:70.
Satou N, Khan AM, Matsumae I, Satou J, Shintani H. In vitro color change of composite- based resins. Dent Mater 1989;5:384–7.
Bagheri R, Burrow MF, Tyas M. Influence of food-simulating solutions and surface end on condition to staining of aesthetic restorative materials. J Dent 2005;33:389–98.
Sunico M, Shinkai K, Katoh Y. Two-year clinical performance of occlusal and cervical giomer restorations. Oper Dent 2005;30:282-9.
Jyothi K, Annapurna S, Kumar AS, Venugopal P, Jayashankara C. Clinical evaluation of giomer- and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in class V noncarious cervical lesions: An in vivo study. J Conserv Dent 2011;14:409-13.
Krithikadatta J. Clinical Effectiveness Of Contemporary Dentin Bonding Agents. J Conserv Dent 2010;13:173-83.
Vaid Ds, Shah Nc, Bilgi Ps. One Year Comparative Clinical Evaluation Of Equia With Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer And A Nanohybrid Composite In Noncarious Cervical Lesions. J Conserv Dent 2015;18:449-52.