AIM: To report on the absence of carious lesions at margins of glass ionomer cement (GIC) and amalgam restorations. METHODS: Six Anglophone and 1 Lusophone databases were searched for articles up to 5 January 2008. Inclusion criteria for articles were: (i) titles/abstracts relevant to topic; (ii) published in English, Portuguese or Spanish language; (iii) reporting on a randomised control trial. Exclusion criteria were: (i) insufficient random allocation of study subjects (ii) operator and subject not blinded, where appropriate; (iii) not all entered subjects accounted for at trial conclusion; (iv) subjects of both groups not followed up the same way. Articles were accepted only if they complied with all the criteria. Ten articles complied with the inclusion criteria and were selected for review. From these 4 were rejected and 6 articles reporting on 8 separate studies accepted. Due to aspects of heterogeneity, studies were sub-grouped before meta- analysis. RESULTS: Significantly less carious lesions were observed on single-surface GIC restorations in permanent teeth after 6 years as compared to restorations with amalgam (OR 2.64 - CI 95% 1.39 - 5.03, p= 0.003). No studies investigating multiple-surface restorations on permanent teeth were identified. Studies investigating carious lesions at margins of restorations in primary teeth showed no difference between both materials after 3 and 8 years. CONCLUSIONS: Carious lesions at margins of single-surface GIC restorations are less common than with amalgam fillings after 6 years in permanent teeth. No difference was observed in primary teeth. More trials are needed in order to confirm these results.
AIM: To report on the absence of carious lesions at margins of glass ionomer cement (GIC) and amalgam restorations. METHODS: Six Anglophone and 1 Lusophone databases were searched for articles up to 5 January 2008. Inclusion criteria for articles were: (i) titles/abstracts relevant to topic; (ii) published in English, Portuguese or Spanish language; (iii) reporting on a randomised control trial. Exclusion criteria were: (i) insufficient random allocation of study subjects (ii) operator and subject not blinded, where appropriate; (iii) not all entered subjects accounted for at trial conclusion; (iv) subjects of both groups not followed up the same way. Articles were accepted only if they complied with all the criteria. Ten articles complied with the inclusion criteria and were selected for review. From these 4 were rejected and 6 articles reporting on 8 separate studies accepted. Due to aspects of heterogeneity, studies were sub-grouped before meta- analysis. RESULTS: Significantly less carious lesions were observed on single-surface GIC restorations in permanent teeth after 6 years as compared to restorations with amalgam (OR 2.64 - CI 95% 1.39 - 5.03, p= 0.003). No studies investigating multiple-surface restorations on permanent teeth were identified. Studies investigating carious lesions at margins of restorations in primary teeth showed no difference between both materials after 3 and 8 years. CONCLUSIONS:Carious lesions at margins of single-surface GIC restorations are less common than with amalgam fillings after 6 years in permanent teeth. No difference was observed in primary teeth. More trials are needed in order to confirm these results.
Authors: Fabiana Gouveia Rolim; Allan David de Araújo Lima; Islany Cardoso Lima Campos; Robson de Sousa Ferreira; Carlos da Cunha Oliveira-Júnior; Vera Lúcia Gomes Prado; Glauber Campos Vale Journal: Int J Dent Date: 2019-12-10