Adhesive Performance of Glass Ionomer and Resin Based Adhesive Systems: A 3 Years Prospective Clinical Evaluation

Mansoura University60 enrolled

Overview

This study aimed to clinically evaluate the 3-years clinical performance of glass ionomer and resin based adhesive systems in Class V restorations.

The formulated null hypothesis was that there is no significant difference in the clinical performances between glass ionomer and resin based adhesive systems in Class V restorations for 3-years. The research question was as follows: Do glass ionomer adhesives in class V restorations present better clinical performances than resin based adhesive systems according to the modified United States Public Health Service (modified-USPHS) criteria?

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

TRIPLE

Enrollment

Conditions

Dental Leakage

Interventions

Etching with phosphoric acid gel (3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA)PROCEDURE

Etching enamel surface using phosphoric acid gel (3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA)

Self-etch adhesive (Kuraray, Tokyo, Japan)PROCEDURE

No Etching enamel surface using phosphoric acid (self-etch technique) (Kuraray, Tokyo, Japan)

Chemical bond adhesive (GC, Corporation, Tokyo, Japan)PROCEDURE

Chemical bond with hydroxyapatite crystals of Enamel (GC, Corporation, Tokyo, Japan)

Eligibility

Sex: ALLMin age: 20 YearsMax age: 35 YearsHealthy volunteers:

Medical Language ↔ Plain English

Inclusion Criteria: 1. Patients with primary caries involving cervical surface only with ICDAS 2 and 3. 2. Patients with normal and full occlusion. 3. Patients with tooth gives positive response to testing with an electric pulp tester. 4. Patients must have a good oral hygiene. 5. Patients with opposing teeth should be natural with no restorations. Exclusion Criteria: 1. High caries risk patients with extremely poor oral hygiene. 2. Patients involved in orthodontic treatment or periodontal surgery. 3. Patients with periodontally involved teeth (chronic periodontitis). 4. Patients with heavy bruxism habits and clenching. 5. Patients with abutments should be excluded.

Locations (1)

Mansoura University

Al Mansurah, Egypt

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Percentage % of patients with marginal staining

Percentage of marginal staining in patients was clinically assessed using USPHS criteria. Restorations were given the score Alpha for the ideal clinical situation, Bravo for clinically acceptable and Charlie for clinically unacceptable and in need for replacement.

Time frame: 3 years after restoration procedure

Data from ClinicalTrials.gov

This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.