Literature DB >> 12771499

Six-year success rates of occlusal amalgam and glass-ionomer restorations placed using three minimal intervention approaches.

G J Mandari1, J E Frencken, M A van't Hof.   

Abstract

The present randomised clinical trial was aimed at comparing three minimally invasive restorative treatment approaches for managing dental caries in occlusal surfaces using a non-gamma-2 amalgam and a low-viscosity glass-ionomer as the restorative material. The treatment approaches tested in parallel groups were: conventional in a university setting, modified-conventional and ultraconservative (Atraumatic Restorative Treatment, ART) approaches in a field setting. A split-mouth design was used in which the two restorative materials were randomly placed in 430 matched contralateral pairs of permanent molar teeth. A total of 152 children from five primary schools were recruited and treated by a dental therapist. The restorations were evaluated after 6 years by 2 calibrated independent examiners. The 6-year successes for all occlusal amalgam and glass-ionomer restorations were 72.6 and 72.3%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences observed between the successes for both amalgam and glass-ionomer restorations placed either by the ART (68.6%, with 95% CI = 61-76%) approach or by the conventional (74.5%, with 95% CI = 65-82%) and the modified-conventional (75.8%, with 95% CI = 67-83%) approaches after 6 years. There was also no statistically significant difference observed between the successes of occlusal ART restorations with glass-ionomer (67.1%, with 95% CI = 56-77%) and occlusal conventional restorations with amalgam (74%, with 95% CI = 61-85%) after 6 years. 'Restoration fracture/marginal defects' and 'loss of material' were the most common causes for failure. The former was more often recorded in amalgam restorations and the latter in glass-ionomer restorations. Secondary caries was observed for 2% of glass-ionomer and for 10% of amalgam restorations. This difference was statistically significant (p = 0.001). The ART approach using glass-ionomer performed equally well as conventional restorative approaches using electrically driven equipment and amalgam for treating dentinal lesions in occlusal surfaces after 6 years. Copyright 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12771499     DOI: 10.1159/000070866

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Caries Res        ISSN: 0008-6568            Impact factor:   4.056


  18 in total

Review 1.  Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rodrigo G de Amorim; Soraya C Leal; Jo E Frencken
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-01-28       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Atraumatic restorative treatment for prevention and treatment of caries in an underserved community.

Authors:  Naty Lopez; Sara Simpser-Rafalin; Peter Berthold
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2005-07-07       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 3.  Atraumatic restorative treatment versus amalgam restoration longevity: a systematic review.

Authors:  Steffen Mickenautsch; Veerasamy Yengopal; Avijit Banerjee
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2009-08-18       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Survival percentages of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations and sealants in posterior teeth: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  R G de Amorim; J E Frencken; D P Raggio; X Chen; X Hu; S C Leal
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  Effects of dual antibacterial agents MDPB and nano-silver in primer on microcosm biofilm, cytotoxicity and dentine bond properties.

Authors:  Ke Zhang; Lei Cheng; Satoshi Imazato; Joseph M Antonucci; Nancy J Lin; Sheng Lin-Gibson; Yuxing Bai; Hockin H K Xu
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  A field-trial of two restorative materials used with atraumatic restorative treatment in rural Turkey: 24-month results.

Authors:  Ertugrul Ercan; C Türksel Dülgergil; Mübin Soyman; Mehmet Dalli; Isil Yildirim
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2009 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.698

7.  Success rates of manual restorative treatment (MRT) with amalgam in permanent teeth in high caries-risk Filipino children.

Authors:  I M Schüler; B Monse; C J Holmgren; T Lehmann; G S Itchon; R Heinrich-Weltzien
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 3.573

8.  Clinical Performance of Viscous Glass Ionomer Cement in Posterior Cavities over Two Years.

Authors:  Roland Frankenberger; Franklin Garcia-Godoy; Norbert Krämer
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2010-02-22

Review 9.  Strong nanocomposites with Ca, PO(4), and F release for caries inhibition.

Authors:  H H K Xu; M D Weir; L Sun; J L Moreau; S Takagi; L C Chow; J M Antonucci
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 6.116

10.  Impact of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) on the treatment profile in pilot government dental clinics in Tanzania.

Authors:  Emil Namakuka Kikwilu; Jo Frencken; Jan Mulder
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2009-06-08       Impact factor: 2.757

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.