A A prospective and randomized clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness of ART restorations with high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement versus conventional restorations with resin composite in Class II cavities of permanent teeth: two-year follow-up

Authors

  • Rafael Menezes-Silva Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Materiais Dentários, Endodontia e Dentística, Bauru, SP
  • Sofia R Maito Velasco Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Saúde Pública, São Paulo, SP
  • Eduardo Bresciani Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Instituto de Ciências e Tecnologia, São José dos Campos, SP
  • Roosevelt da Silva Bastos Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Materiais Dentários, Endodontia e Dentística, Bauru, SP
  • Maria Fidela de Lima Navarro Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Materiais Dentários, Endodontia e Dentística, Bauru, SP

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2020-0609%20

Keywords:

Permanent dentition, Atraumatic restorative treatment, Glass-ionomer cement, Resin composite, Clinical trial

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of ART restorations using High Viscosity Glass-ionomer cement (HVGIC) with conventional restorations using resin composite in Class II cavities of permanent teeth, in a 2-year follow-up. Methodology: Seventy-seven restorations were made with each restorative material, Equia Fil-GC Corporation (ART restorations) and Z350-3M (conventional restoration), in 54 participants in this parallel and randomized clinical trial. Restorations were evaluated at 6 months, 1 and 2 years using the ART and the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Chi-square test and Survival Analysis (p<0.05) were used for statistical analysis. Results: The success rates for ART restorations were 98.7% (6 months) and 95.8% (1 year) for both criteria. At 2 years, success rate was 92% and 90.3% when scored by the modified USPHS and ART criteria (p=0.466), respectively. The success rates for conventional restorations were 100% (6 months), 98.7% (1 year) and 91.5% (2 years) for both assessment criteria. ART restorations presented a lower survival rate by the criterion of ART (83.7%) when compared to the modified USPHS criterion of (87.8%), after 2 years (p=0.051). The survival of conventional restorations was 90.7% for both evaluation criteria. Conclusion: At the 2-years follow-up evaluation, no statistically significant difference was observed between the success rate of ART restorations with HVGIC compared to conventional restorations with resin composite in Class II cavities of permanent teeth.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2021-06-14

Issue

Section

Original Articles

How to Cite

A A prospective and randomized clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness of ART restorations with high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement versus conventional restorations with resin composite in Class II cavities of permanent teeth: two-year follow-up. (2021). Journal of Applied Oral Science, 29, e20200609. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2020-0609