Clinical evaluation of giomer- and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in class V noncarious cervical lesions: An in vivo study Direct Contra Naïve-Indirect Comparison of Clinical Failure Rates between High-Viscosity GIC and Conventional Amalgam Restorations: An Empirical Study Evaluation of a resin modified glass ionomer serving both as indirect pulp therapy and as restorative material for primary molars Clinical evaluation of three restorative materials applied in a minimal intervention caries treatment approach. Is high-viscosity glass-ionomer-cement a successor to amalgam for treating primary molars? Long-term clinical evaluation of fracture and pulp injury following glass-ionomer cement or composite resin applied as a base filling in teeth restored with amalgam. A clinical comparison of glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer and resin composite restorations in the treatment of cervical caries in xerostomic head and neck radiation patients. Atraumatic Restorative Treatment with Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Material: Short-Term Results of a Pilot Study Survival of glass ionomer restorations placed in primary molars using atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) and conventional cavity preparations: 2-year results. Short-term in situ/ex vivo study of the anticariogenic potential of a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement associated with adhesive systems. Two-year evaluation of Class II resin-modified glass ionomer cement/composite open sandwich and composite restorations Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional restorative procedures in a hospital clinic: evaluation after 30 months. Two-year clinical evaluation of resinous restorative systems in non-carious cervical lesions. The survival of resin modified glass ionomer and stainless steel crown restorations in primary molars, placed in a specialist paediatric dental practice A clinical evaluation of resin-based composite and glass ionomer cement restorations placed in primary teeth using the ART approach: results at 24 months. A comparative sealability study of different retrofilling materials. Inhibition of demineralization adjacent to tooth-colored restorations in primary teeth after 2 in vitro challenges.
Objectives : To evaluate and compare the clinical performance of Giomer ( Beautifil II ) and RMGIC ( Fuji II LC ) in noncarious cervical lesions . Material s and Methods : Thirty-two subjects with one or two pairs of noncarious cervical lesions were included in the study . Each pair of lesion was restored with either giomer or RMGIC assigned r and omly . Clinical evaluation of restorations was done using USPHS criteria . Data was formulated in a pre design ed format and subjected to statistical analysis using the chi square test . Results : Statistically significant difference was found between RMGIC and Giomer with respect to surface roughness with P value < 0.001 . Conclusion : Giomer showed superior surface finish compared to RMGIC . Both Giomer and RMGIC showed equal retention ability Background Naïve-indirect comparisons are comparisons between competing clinical interventions ’ evidence from separate ( uncontrolled ) trials . Direct comparisons are comparisons within r and omised control trials ( RCTs ) . The objective of this empirical study is to test the null-hypothesis that trends and performance differences inferred from naïve-indirect comparisons and from direct comparisons/ RCTs regarding the failure rates of  amalgam and direct high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement ( HVGIC ) restorations in permanent posterior teeth have similar direction and magnitude . Methods A total of 896 citations were identified through systematic literature search . From these , ten and two uncontrolled clinical longitudinal studies for HVGIC and amalgam , respectively , were included for naïve-indirect comparison and could be matched with three out twenty RCTs . Summary effects sizes were computed as Odds ratios ( OR ; 95 % Confidence intervals ) and compared with those from RCTs . Trend directions were inferred from 95 % Confidence interval overlaps and direction of point estimates ; magnitudes of performance differences were inferred from the median point estimates ( OR ) with 25 % and 75 % percentile range , for both types of comparison . Mann-Whitney U test was applied to test for statistically significant differences between point estimates of both comparison types . Results Trends and performance differences inferred from naïve-indirect comparison based on evidence from uncontrolled clinical longitudinal studies and from direct comparisons based on RCT evidence are not the same . The distributions of the point estimates differed significantly for both comparison types ( Mann – Whitney U = 25 , nindirect = 26 ; ndirect = 8 ; p = 0.0013 , two-tailed ) . Conclusion The null-hypothesis was rejected . Trends and performance differences inferred from either comparison between HVGIC and amalgam restorations failure rates in permanent posterior teeth are not the same . It is recommended that clinical practice guidance regarding HVGICs should rest on direct comparisons via RCTs and not on naïve-indirect comparisons based on uncontrolled longitudinal studies in order to avoid inflation of effect estimates AIM : The successful performance of resin modified glass ionomer cement ( RMGIC ) as an indirect pulp therapy ( IPT ) dressing material and , independently , as a class II restoration material for primary molars has been adequately documented . This study investigates if an RMGIC can be successfully used in a dual capacity . METHODS : A total of 61 , 3.5–8.5 year old children with deep proximal carious lesions in one or more primary molars , radiographically suspected of pulp exposure , were included . Exclusion criteria were : continuous unprovoked pain and an exposed or a non-vital pulp . Following adequate caries removal , RMGIC restorations were placed . The teeth were followed-up for signs/symptoms and for restoration survival according to modified United States Public Health Service ( USPHS ) criteria . Descriptive statistics were applied . RESULTS : The prospect i ve study was completed with 86 restorations in 41 first and 45 second primary molars . Three of the 86 teeth showed pulp necrosis and the remaining 83 ( 96.5 % ) were a ) asymptomatic for a mean clinical observation time of 31.9 months ( SD 10.8 ) and b ) with no radiographic signs of pathology for 25.7 months ( SD 10.3 ) . Seventy-six of these 83 ( 91.6 % ) class II-‘extended ’ restorations were acceptable , exhibiting varying levels of occlusal wear . CONCLUSIONS : A single application of RMGIC was used successfully for over 2 1/2 years as an IPT and restoration material in proximal caries of primary molars OBJECTIVES This paper reports on a longitudinal evaluation of three material s ( glass ionomer , zinc oxide-eugenol cement , and composite ) employed in a minimal restorative intervention approach of 81 high caries-active pregnant women selected for a preventive oral health program in Brazil . The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical behavior of the glass ionomer cement , currently indicated in programs for control of carious lesions . METHODS The patients were r and omly divided into two groups . Both groups were engaged in an oral health promotion approach . In Group 1 , 417 glass ionomer restorations were placed in 43 individuals , involving all types and sizes of cavities . In the second group , 213 posterior zinc oxide-eugenol ( ZOE ) restorations and 127 anterior composite restorations were placed in 38 patients . Minimal cavity preparations were made , in which only soft or infected dentin was removed , on the basis of clinical judgment . RESULTS After two years , the restorations were clinical ly evaluated by two examiners for marginal integrity , amount of wear , presence of fracture , carious lesions , and lost restorations . Statistical analysis ( chi-square test ) identified statistically significant difference between glass ionomer and ZOE ( 90.6 % vs 9.2 % ) . Comparing glass ionomer and composite , similar survival rates were observed . The success rate observed for the glass ionomer cement ranged from 77.1 percent to 92.5 percent , depending on the type and size of cavity in which it was applied . Four teeth restored with glass ionomer cement and one tooth restored with composite showed caries signs . Regarding the ZOE restorations , caries was always associated with other causes of failure such as excessive wear , restoration loss , or marginal defects , with no possibility of separate evaluation . Despite the preventive and therapeutic measurements employed , a mean increase of 2.15 new surfaces with cavities was observed in Group 1 , as well as 2.83 surfaces presenting the same status in Group 2 . CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated that highly viscous glass ionomer cement applied in a minimal intervention approach provided high- quality preventive and restorative care after two years to a population at high risk for caries . The composite was employed in cavities exposed to lower stress , such as in the anterior teeth , and its behavior was comparable to that of the glass ionomer cement . The reinforced ZOE presented a high failure rate , thus contraindicating its use for such purpose OBJECTIVES To assess and compare the cumulative survival rate of amalgam and atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) restorations in primary molars over 3 years . METHODS 280 children aged 6 - 7 years old were enrolled in a cluster r and omized controlled clinical trial using a parallel group design covering two treatment groups : conventional restorative treatment with amalgam ( CRT ) and atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) using a high-viscosity glass-ionomer ( HVGIC ) Ketac Molar Easymix . Three pedodontists placed 750 restorations ( 364 amalgam and 386 ART in 126 and 154 children , respectively ) which were evaluated at 0.5 , 1 , 2 and 3 years . The proportional hazard rate regression model with frailty correction , ANOVA and Wald tests , and the Jackknife procedure were applied in analysing the data . RESULTS The cumulative survival rates over 3 years for all , single- and multiple-surface CRT/amalgam restorations ( 72.6 % , 93.4 % , 64.7 % , respectively ) were no different from those of comparable ART/HVGIC restorations ( 66.8 % ; 90.1 % and 56.4 % , respectively ) ( p=0.10 ) . Single-surface restorations had higher survival rates than multiple-surface restorations for the both treatment procedures ( p<0.0001 ) . A higher proportion of restorations failed because of mechanical reasons ( 94.8 % ) than of secondary caries ( 5.2 % ) . No difference in reasons for restoration failures between all types of amalgam and ART/HVGIC restorations were observed ( p=0.24 ) . SIGNIFICANCE The high-viscosity glass-ionomer used in this study in conjunction with the ART is a viable option for restoring carious dentin lesions in single surfaces in vital primary molars The aim of this research was to analyse the long-term clinical behaviour of two dental material s applied as filling under  silver amalgam restorations  : glass-ionomer cement ( GIC ) and composite resin with adhesive system ( CR ) . In this study , 117 posterior teeth ( 29 premolars and 88 molars ) were selected with carious lesions which result ed in great loss of dentin and cusps with unsupported enamel . After caries removal , cavities were prepared and totally filled with GIC or with CR . In a following visit , new cavities were prepared , leaving the employed filling material as a base and support for the enamel , which were then restored with silver amalgam . Restorations were evaluated periodically after 6 months and up to 5 years . Both fracture and pulpal involvement rates were low . Although differences could be observed in the behaviour of the material s , statistical survival estimation showed that the performances of GIC and CR as filling material were similar . There was a significant association both between kind of tooth ( molar or premolar ) and long-term survival of the restorations ; and between degree of unsupported enamel and the same long-term survival . Our results confirmed that the technique in which GIC or CR are used as filling under  silver amalgam restorations is clinical ly acceptable Controversy exists as to whether there is less secondary caries at the margins of glass ionomer restorations compared with other material s that do not release fluoride . This study examined the incidence of secondary caries for three types of restorative material s in Class V restorations in xerostomic patients . The study group consisted of 45 high caries-risk adult patients who had undergone head and neck irradiation for the treatment of cancer . All were substantially xerostomic and in need of at least three restorations in the same arch . Every patient received a restoration with each of the test material s , a conventional glass ionomer ( GI ) , a resin modified glass ionomer ( RMGI ) and a resin composite ( C ) . Patients were instructed in the daily use of a neutral pH sodium fluoride gel in custom trays . Recall appointments were made at 6 , 12 , 18 and 24 months , and the restorations were examined for material loss , marginal integrity and recurrent caries at the restoration margin . Fluoride compliance was determined at each recall period and recorded as the percentage of recommended use during that interval . Patients were categorized at the end of the study as fluoride non-users if their average compliance was 50 % or less . Those with greater than 50 % compliance were categorized as fluoride users . In the latter group , no recurrent caries was found for any of the restorations , whereas a material -dependent incidence of recurrent caries was found in the fluoride non-user group . None of the GI , one RMGI and eight C restorations failed due to recurrent caries . For the fluoride non-user patients , Fishers exact test ( p=0.05 ) showed no statistical difference between GI and RMGI but statistical differences were found among those material s and resin composite at each recall period . Recurrent caries reductions for GI and RMGI relative to C were greater than 80 % in xerostomic patients not using topical fluoride supplementation Objectives : The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of the resin-modified glass ionomer ( RMGI ) material in atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach and compare RMGI with the high-strength traditional glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) in permanent teeth with one or more surface-carious cavities . Material s and Methods : This study was conducted in a village school in rural southeastern Anatolia , Turkey . The RMGI and GIC restorations with the ART technique were placed r and omly employing a split mouth design . In addition , the ART approach was used when necessary for both primary and /or permanent teeth with no pulpal involvement and no perceived pain before treatment . Ninety-one fillings were placed on contralateral molar pairs of 37 children . Baseline and 6-month evaluation of the fillings were made with the classic ART , modified Ryge and USPHS criteria . Results : Based on the ART criteria , 100 % of RMGI and 92.4 % of GIC restorations were classified as successful after 6 months , and the difference between the 2 groups was statistically significant ( p = 0.009 ) . While marginal discoloration was the commonest failure in the RMGI group according to both the modified Ryge and USPHS criteria , unsatisfactory surface texture and low anatomic form were the commonly seen failures in the ART technique . Conclusion : Generally , for each rating system , RMGI exhibited better clinical performance than GIC in all categories , except for marginal discoloration . Results based on the 6-month evaluation show that RMGI can be an alternative material to the GIC OBJECTIVE To compare the survival of  glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) restorations placed in a dental clinic setting using both the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach with h and instruments , and conventional cavity preparation with rotary instruments . METHOD AND MATERIAL S Two encapsulated high-strength conventional GICs ( Fuji IX GP , Ketac-Molar Aplicap ) were placed in 82 Class I and 53 Class II preparations and one encapsulated non-gamma 2 amalgam alloy ( GK-amalgam ) was placed in 32 Class I preparations , in the primary molars of 60 Chinese children with a mean age of 7.40 + /- 1.24 ( SD ) years . Thus , 9 treatment groups were formed . RESULTS After two years , there were no significant survival differences found among 7 of the 9 treatment groups ( p = 0.99 ) . However , two groups comprising Fuji IX GP and Ketac-Molar Aplicap placed in Class II cavities prepared using the ART approach showed significantly lower restoration survivals ( p < 0.001 ) . Only 3 of the 72 initially sealed fissures adjacent to the restorations appeared to retain any GIC material . CONCLUSIONS In a clinic setting , both the ART h and instrument and conventional rotary instrument methods were equally suitable for high Class I restoration survival , but not for Class II restoration survival where the conventional cavity preparation method was preferable OBJECTIVE As resin-modified glass-ionomer cement ( RMGIC ) is an adhesive material , its association to dentin bonding agents ( DBAs ) was previously proposed . This study investigated the adjunctive behavior of an RMGIC with etch- and -rinse bonding systems under in situ/ex vivo cariogenic challenge . METHOD AND MATERIAL S Bovine enamel blocks ( 3 3 3 3 2 mm ) were r and omly assigned to group VP , Vitremer + its own primer ( 3 M ESPE ) ; group VSB , Vitremer + Single Bond ( 3 M ESPE ) ; and group VPB , Vitremer + Prime and Bond 2.1 ( Dentsply ) . Two blocks of each group were r and omly placed in an acrylic palatal appliance , so each appliance included six blocks . Volunteers ( n = 10 ) wore these appliances according to given instructions to promote a sucrose challenge eight times/day for 15 days . After this period , the blocks were removed from the devices and cleaned , and demineralization was assessed through longitudinal microhardness analysis ( Knoop indenter , 25 g/5 s ) . Data were su bmi tted to three-way ANOVA and Tukey test ( P < .05 ) . RESULTS No treatment was able to completely avoid demineralization . All material s showed a statistically significant difference in mineral loss when the microhardness on the outer enamel was compared with deeper regions ( P < .05 ) . CONCLUSION Association of the tested RMGICs with etch- and -rinse DBAs did not seem to be more beneficial against caries than the conventional treatment with RMGIC Abstract Restorations made of a combination of resin modified glass ionomer cement ( RMGIC ) and composite resin ( CR ) – open s and wich fillings – have been recommended for use in proximal boxes of molar cavities . The aim of this study was to compare the clinical behaviour over time of RMGIC/CR s and wich restorations versus CR restorations in Class II molar cavities . During a period of 2 years , a total of 220 restorations were placed in 118 patients by one operator ( VV ) . A r and om block allocation was used to allocate cavities to one of the two restorative techniques . Bitewing radiographs and photographs were taken at baseline and at annual recall appointments . At present , a total of 210 restorations have been evaluated after 1 year and 141 restorations after 2 years . All restorations were evaluated using a modification of USPHS criteria . A total of three RMGIC/CR and two CR restorations ( 2.8 % ) were rated as failures caused by endodontic complications or major fractures . Twenty-eight teeth were reported to have postoperative sensitivity at the baseline evaluation 1 week following placement . Nine RMGIC/CR ( 8.5 % ) and four CR ( 4.9 % ) restorations with minor fractures were rated Charlie but were still acceptable . Bitewing radiographs revealed progression of carious lesions in proximal surfaces of originally intact or restored teeth adjacent to five ( 5.9 % ) RMGIC/CR restorations and eight ( 10.9 % ) CR restorations . No statistically significant differences between the two types of restoration were observed with respect to marginal adaptation , discoloration and caries progression . However , a higher number of large CR fillings exhibited postoperative sensitivity at baseline compared to moderate CR or extensive and moderate RMGIC/CR restorations OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to evaluate two glass-ionomer cements placed in the occlusal surfaces of permanent molar teeth , using two cavity preparation methods . METHOD AND MATERIAL S Three dentists placed 149 restorations for 68 patients in a hospital clinic .  Atraumatic restorative treatment or conventional cavity preparation methods were used for two encapsulated , high-strength conventional glass-ionomer cements : Fuji IX GP and Ketac-Molar . Non-gamma 2 amalgam alloy was used in conventional preparations for comparison . RESULTS The restorative procedures were uneventful , but cavity preparations made with atraumatic restorative treatment h and instruments took approximately twice as long as did conventional rotary instrumentation . After 30 months , only one glass-ionomer cement restoration had failed . Both glass-ionomer cements showed high early losses of sealant material , but caries was not detected in the exposed fissures . Both glass-ionomer cements also showed relatively high restoration wear . At 30 months , the mean cumulative net occlusal wear was 119 + /- 12 mm for Fuji IX GP and 96 + /- 13 mm for Ketac-Molar ; the difference was not statistically significant . Color matching improved significantly by 6 months ; there was no significant difference in color match between the two glass-ionomer cements by 12 months . Minor surface tarnishing and marginal discrepancies were present in the amalgam restorations and increased with time . CONCLUSION The occlusal restorations performed satisfactorily over periods of up to 30 months . However , the continued deterioration of the cements requires longer-term studies to be undertaken This controlled clinical trial evaluated the 2-year clinical performance of a one-bottle etch- and -rinse adhesive and resin composite system ( Excite/Tetric Ceram ) compared to a resin-modified glass ionomer cement ( RMGIC ) ( Vitremer/3 M ) in non-carious cervical lesions . Seventy cervical restorations ( 35 resin composite - RC- restorations and 35 RMGIC restorations ) were placed by a single operator in 30 patients under rubber dam isolation without mechanical preparation . All restorations were evaluated blindly by 2 independent examiners using the modified USPHS criteria at baseline , and after 6 , 12 and 24 months . Data were analyzed statistically by Fisher 's exact and McNemar tests . After 2 years , 59 out of 70 restorations were evaluated . As much as 78.8 % retention rate was recorded for RC restorations , while 100 % retention was obtained for RMGIC restorations . Fisher 's exact test showed significant differences ( p=0.011 ) for retention . However , there were no significant differences for marginal integrity , marginal discoloration , anatomic form and secondary caries between the RC and RMGIC restorations . The McNemar test detected significant differences for Excite/TC between baseline and the 2-year recall for retention ( p=0.02 ) , marginal integrity ( p=0.002 ) and anatomic form ( p=0.04 ) . Therefore , the one-bottle etch- and -rinse bonding system/resin composite showed an inferior clinical performance compared to the RMGIC Aims To prospect ively report on the survival of resin-modified glass ionomer cement ( RMGIC ) , photac-fil and pre-formed stainless steel crown ( SSC ) restorations in primary molar teeth placed over a seven-year period in a specialist paediatric dental practice under private contract of remuneration . Method All primary molar restorations placed by a specialist paediatric dentist over a seven-year period were review ed and the outcome results recorded . Data were recorded at review visits until June 30 , 2003 . Data recorded included Class I restorations , Class II restorations and SSC . The Class II cavities were either mesial or distal , with or without buccal/palatal extensions . If both proximal surfaces were decayed or if after cavity preparation the result ant outline form was significantly larger than the minimal classical form , RMGIC was not used ; an SSC was placed instead . Stainless steel crown preparation followed conventional guidelines . The crowns were cemented with reinforced zinc oxide and eugenol ( Kalzinol ) . The status was recorded as satisfactory restoration , tooth exfoliated , tooth extracted for orthodontic reasons with the date of extraction , or needing replacement . If replaced then the reason for replacement was also recorded . Results A total of 544 Class I RMGICs , 962 Class II RMGICs , and 1,010 SSCs  were placed . At the last review of each restoration , 98.3 % of Class I , 97.3 % of Class II RMGICs and 97.0 % of SSCs were either satisfactory or withdrawn intact . Conclusion Under the conditions of private specialist practice -based study SSCs continued to prove very successful for the restoration of larger cavities and for pulp-treated primary molar teeth . For the smaller cavities RMGIC were also very successful BACKGROUND The authors evaluated the 24-month performance of a packable resin-based composite/dentin bonding system and a high-viscosity glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) in restorations placed in primary molars with the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART )  approach . METHODS Three dentists placed 419 restorations in 219 children aged 6 through 10 years who had bilateral matched pairs of carious posterior Class I and II primary teeth . They used a split-mouth design to place the two material s , which were assigned r and omly to contralateral sides . The authors evaluated the restorations according to U.S. Public Health Service Ryge criteria . RESULTS After 24 months , 96.7 percent of the Class I GIC restorations and 91 percent of the resin-based composite restorations survived , while the success rates for the Class II restorations were 76.1 percent and 82 percent for the GIC and resin-based composite restorations , respectively . The survival rate of the Class II resin-based composite restorations was 5.9 percent higher than that of the GIC restorations at the 24-month evaluation , but this difference was not statistically significant . However , the study results showed a statistically significant difference in survival rates between Class I and II restorations for both material s. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPLICATION S The two-year clinical performance of both material s was satisfactory for the restoration of Class I and II primary molars using the ART approach The purpose of this study was to compare the sealing ability of high-copper amalgam , glass ionomer cement , and silver glass ionomer cement as retrofilling material s when used with and without varnish . Seventy extracted human single-rooted anterior teeth were instrumented and the root canals obturated with laterally condensed gutta-percha and sealer . The apical 3 mm of each root was resected and a 2 mm-deep apical Class I preparation cut . The roots were then r and omly allocated to six groups of 10 teeth and retrofilled with one of the experiment material s. Group I comprised high-copper amalgam ; group 2 , high-copper amalgam with cavity varnish ; group 3 , glass ionomer cement without varnish ; group 4 , glass ionomer cement with varnish ; group 5 , silver glass ionomer cement without varnish ; and group 6 , silver glass ionomer cement with varnish . Two groups of five roots each were used as positive and negative controls . The root surfaces were coated with nail polish and specimens immersed in 2 % methylene blue solution for 14 days . After vertical sectioning , dye penetration was examined under a stereomicroscope . The results of the study were analysed statistically . The sealing ability of the conventional glass ionomer cement with varnish was significantly better while dye penetration was higher in silver glass ionomer cement without varnish group than the other groups ( P < 0.01 ) PURPOSE As clinical diagnosis of secondary caries is the most common reason for restoration replacement , fluoride-releasing restorative material s have been developed to address this problem . The purpose s of this study were to verify demineralization inhibition produced by 5 restorative material s su bmi tted to two methods of in vitro cariogenic challenge and verify whether these methods influence material behavior by means of polarized light microscopy and microhardness . METHODS Class V cavities were prepared on buccal surfaces of 100 extracted primary molars and r and omly restored with 1 of the 4 fluoride-releasing material s , Fuji IX , Vitremer , Dyract , Tetric Ceram , and Filtek Z250 as control material ( N=10 ) . Specimens were su bmi tted to in vitro caries induction by two different methods , acid gel immersion , and pH cycling . Teeth su bmi tted to gel were then sectioned and prepared for polarized light microscopy in water , while teeth cycled were prepared for microhardness evaluation . RESULTS Polarized light microscopy : Means of demineralization areas ( microm(2 ) ) differed significantly , depending on the restorative material . Tukey 's test revealed the smallest demineralization areas adjacent to Fuji IX and Vitremer restorations , with no difference between them ( P>.05 ) . The greatest demineralization area mean values were verified using Dyract and Filtek Z250 , without differences between them ( P>.05 ) . Microhardness : Glass ionomer cements ( GICs ) performed better on the area of great cariogenic challenge , closer to the surface , than other material s indicating minor mineral loss during pH cycling . The compomer Dyract presented similar performance to GICs and composite resin Tetric Ceram , but it was better than Filtek Z250 . CONCLUSION The experimental model of caries lesion induction may influence material performance . GICs , however , are superior in preventing in vitro demineralization independently of the method
Conclusion The current evidence suggests lack of support for the hypothesis that high-viscosity glass-ionomer cements are inferior to silver amalgam as restorative material s for permanent posterior teeth .
Background To develop a synthesis within a Bayesian probability framework of previously established evidence , in order to derive an overall conclusion about the hypothesis ( H1 ) : ‘ High-viscosity glass-ionomer cements ( HVGIC ) are inferior to silver amalgam as ( load bearing ) restorative material s for permanent posterior teeth ’ .