Two-year clinical performance of a polyacid-modified resin composite and a resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative material

This study compared the clinical performance of a polyacid-modified resin composite and a resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative material over two years. Thirty-four pairs of restorations of Compoglass and Fuji II LC were placed in caries-free cervical erosion/abfraction lesions without tooth preparation. Restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months using modified Ryge/USPHS criteria. A significantly higher incidence of failed restorations was found with the polyacid-modified resin composite (p < 0.05).     

Evaluation of esthetic parameters of resin-modified glass-ionomer materials and a polyacid-modified resin composite in Class V cervical lesions.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the esthetics of 3 resin-modified glass-ionomer materials and 1 polyacid-modified resin composite to the esthetics of a conventional glass-ionomer control material. METHOD AND MATERIALS: One hundred eighty-seven Class V cervical restorations were observed clinically over 18 months. The esthetic index system that was used evaluated color match, translucency or opacity, and surface roughness. RESULTS: The tested materials behaved very dissimilarly and inconsistently. In general, the esthetic results of the resin-modified glass-ionomer materials and the polyacid-modified resin composite were far from optimal. The esthetic appearance of restorations seriously deteriorated during clinical service, mainly because of discoloration of margins, changes in translucency and opacity, and rapidly appearing roughness or dullness on the surface. Both the resin-modified glass-ionomer materials and the polyacid-modified resin composite evaluated in this study performed better esthetically than did the conventional glass-ionomer material. CONCLUSION: Indications for these combination materials are limited to areas where esthetics is not a primary concern but where their ease of application may guarantee a more durable functional result.     

Effect of fluoride gels on micromorphology of resin-modified glass-ionomer cements and polyacid-modified resin composites.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surface micromorphology of resin-modified glass-ionomer cements and polyacid-modified resin composites subjected to a neutral sodium fluoride (NNaF) and an acidulated phosphate fluoride (APF) gel application. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Thirty standardized cylindric specimens were randomly obtained from each of two resin-modified glass-ionomer cements-Fuji II LC Improved and Photac-Fil Aplicap-and two polyacid-modified resin composites--Dyract and F2000-amounting to 120 samples. After 1 week, the specimens were finished and polished with aluminum oxide disks. Surface treatments with fluoride gels, or distilled water as a control, were performed four times, interspersed with eight pH cycles, simulating high cariogenic challenges. Five calibrated evaluators assessed the surface micromorphology through photomicrographs. RESULTS: The Kruskal-Wallis test showed no significant difference between the control and experimental groups for Fuji II LC Improved and Dyract. Photac-Fil Aplicap showed less micromorphologic change as a result of distilled water application, unlike the NNaF and APF treatments, which revealed no significant difference from each other. For F2000, there was no significant difference between the surfaces treated by NNaF and distilled water; the highest degradation occurred with the APF. CONCLUSION: Both the resin-modified glass-ionomer cements and the polyacid-modified resin composites showed erratic behaviors concerning their micromorphology when subjected to fluoride gel application.     

Clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer and two polyacid-modified resin composites in cervical lesions restorations: 1-year follow-up

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Vitremer) and two polyacid-modified resin composites (F2000 and Freedom) over 1 year. Nineteen patients with at least three cervical lesions were selected, providing an initial sample size of 87 restorations (29 per material), being 78 to non-carious and nine to carious lesions. Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6 months and 1 year after placement, using modified US Public Health Service criteria: colour match, marginal discoloration, caries, anatomical form, marginal integrity and surface texture. At baseline, restorations were considered as acceptable for all criteria. At 1-year recall, 21 restorations per material were re-examined. Freedom was rated Bravo or Charlie for all the examined criteria and Vitremer earned an Alfa rating solely for the criterion caries. On the contrary, F2000 showed the best overall results, although presenting significant alteration in colour match. Statistical analysis of data was performed using chi-square and Mc Nemar tests. As to the evaluated periods, significant difference was observed solely between baseline and 1-year recall. Freedom and Vitremer were statistically different (P < 0.01) as to anatomical form and surface texture. For F2000, significant difference (P < 0.05) was noticed as to colour match and anatomical form. After 1-year follow-up, F2000 showed the most acceptable results as to the analysed criteria.     

Short-term clinical evaluation of a resin-modified glass-ionomer luting cement.

OBJECTIVES: Resin-reinforced glass-ionomer cements were developed by adding resin components to conventional glass-ionomer cement. This improved physical properties and bonding characteristics. FujiCEM is the first paste-paste-type resin-modified glass-ionomer luting cement that enables consistent mixture. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term clinical performance of FujiCEM, which was used for final cementation of indirect restorations, such as inlays, crowns, and fixed partial dentures. METHOD AND MATERIALS: A total of 290 restorations (165 crowns, 71 inlays, 15 onlays, 36 fixed partial dentures, 3 implant superstructures) were placed in 268 patients (137 males, 131 females) with a mean age of 54.4+/-13.0 years. Restorations were luted with FujiCEM mixed for 10 seconds after the teeth surfaces were treated with a conditioner containing 10% citric acid and 2% ferric chloride for 20 seconds, washed, and dried with gentle air flow. Out of the investigated 337 teeth, 99 (29%) teeth were vital, and 238 (71%) were nonvital. These restorations were followed up for a period of 21 months. All the restorations were evaluated for postoperative sensitivity, secondary caries, gingival condition, and pocket depth. RESULTS: No clinical failures (eg, dislodgment, secondary caries, irritation of soft tissue, and postoperative sensitivity) were observed. CONCLUSION: FujiCEM had promising clinical performance with inlays, crowns, onlays, fixed partial dentures, and implant superstructures at 21 months after service.     

Two-year clinical performance of Class V resin-modified glass-lonomer and resin composite restorations

While a one-year report had been previously published, this study was undertaken to evaluate the clinical performance and appearance of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite over two years. Thirty-seven pairs of restorations of FujI II LC and Z 250/Single Bond were placed in caries-free cervical erosion/abfraction lesions without tooth preparation. Restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months using modified Ryge/USPHS criteria. No statistically significant difference (p = 0.13) was observed in the overall performance of the materials. Retention was 96% for the resin-modified glass ionomer and 81% for the resin composite, with no additional restorations of either material lost after one year. As previously reported, retention of the Z 250 restorations at six months was below the minimum specified in the ADA Acceptance Program for Dentin and Enamel Adhesives. The resin composite restorations generally had a better appearance, with a 100% alpha rating in color match, versus 85% for the resin-modified glass ionomer.     

Three-year clinical evaluation of a resin modified glass-ionomer cement and a composite resin in non-carious class V lesions

The purpose of this study was a 3-year clinical evaluation of a resin modified glass-ionomer and a composite resin restorative material in non-carious class V lesions. In 24 patients 98 non-carious class V lesions were restored with either a resin modified glass-ionomer (Vitremer), or a composite resin restoration (Z100). The restorations were clinically evaluated after 6, 12, 24 and 36 months with the US Public Health Service criteria. At 3 years, 88 teeth of 21 patients were evaluated. All restorations were rated clinically acceptable for colour match, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation and anatomical form. Restoration retention of both groups was high without any statistically significant difference. However, Vitremer restorations showed a lower incidence of Alfa scores for colour match and marginal discoloration than Z100 restorations (P < 0.05).     

Fluoride release from a polyacid-modified resin composite and 3 resin-modified glass-ionomer materials.

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to compare the fluoride ion release from a freshly mixed polyacid-modified resin composite, or "compomer" (Dyract), and 3 resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (Fuji II LC, Photac-Fil, and Vitremer) and to compare the use of 3 units for measuring fluoride release. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Five specimens (3.0 x 2.7 mm) of each material were prepared. The specimens were placed in polypropylene vials with 2 mL of deionized water and stored at 37 degrees C. The solutions were replaced weekly and the levels of fluoride ions were analyzed at days 1, 7, and 30 and subsequently every 28 days for 253 days. Fluoride measurements were carried out using a fluoride ion-selective electrode connected to a pH ion-selective electrode meter. Fluoride ion release was measured in parts per million, micrograms per square centimeter, and micrograms per cubic millimeter. RESULTS: Fuji II LC, Photac-Fil, and Vitremer showed high initial release values, which decreased exponentially and then showed a slow decline during the ensuing time. Dyract released significantly less fluoride ions during the first 84 days than did the 3 resin-modified glass-ionomer cements and maintained this low level of release throughout the study period. The amounts of fluoride ion release measured at any time interval varied with the units of measurement chosen, but the pattern of release remained the same. CONCLUSION: There was a wide variation in the amounts of fluoride ions released from related products, but the patterns of release were similar and unaffected by the units of measurement used.     

Marginal adaptation and retention of a glass-ionomer, resin-modified glass-ionomers and a polyacid-modified resin composite in cervical Class-V lesions.

OBJECTIVES: An 18-month follow-up clinical trial of one conventional glass-ionomer (HIFI Master Palette), three resin-modified glass-ionomers (Fuji II LC, Vitremer, 3M Exp. 155) and one polyacid-modified resin composite (Dyract) was conducted to evaluate their clinical effectiveness in Class-V cervical lesions. In addition, the interface between dentin and two resin-modified glass-ionomers and one polyacid-modified resin composite was examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). METHODS: After evaluation of the restorations immediately following placement (baseline), all patients were subjected to a strict recall schedule with controls at 6, 12 and 18 months. The clinical effectiveness was recorded in terms of retention and marginal integrity, clinical microleakage, caries recurrence, and tooth vitality. A chi 2-test (p < 0.05) was used to test for significant differences between materials. In case of restoration loss or special defects, a replica was made to examine the surface texture and restoration margins by SEM. In vitro, the interface was examined by SEM after an argon-ion-beam etching technique was used to enhance surface relief and disclose interfacial substructures. RESULTS: Retention appeared to be good for all the materials tested. Marginal discrepancies were localized at the incisal enamel and/or the cervical dentin margin, except for the polyacid-modified resin composite that showed most of the defects at the incisal enamel margin. None of the systems could guarantee margins free of microleakage for a long time. In vitro, the type of dentin pre-treatment defines to a great extent the morphology of the resultant interface between dentin and the restorative material tested. SIGNIFICANCE: In this clinical study, the retention rate of the tested materials was good and even excellent for some products. Perfect marginal adaptation deteriorated too fast. The marginal adaptation of the polyacid-modified resin composite at the enamel site would probably have been better by the use of selective enamel or total acid etching. Marginal sealing remains a problem. Future research should concentrate on improving the marginal adaptation and sealing capacities before a broader clinical use can be advocated.     

Network competition in a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement.

Attempts have been made to improve the mechanical properties and convenience of use of glass-ionomer cement (GIC) by various modifications, in particular by including a free radical-polymerizable component ("resin-modified" GIC, RMGIC). Necessarily, the one replaces part of the other, but the chemistry suggests that the formation of each network separately would inhibit diffusion and thus the other reaction. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain whether interference occurs between the components of an RMGIC by variation of the irradiation regime. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cylindrical specimens (6 mm x 3 mm diameter) of one brand of RMGIC (Shades A3, D2; Fuji II LC, GC; capsules) were prepared in ptfe moulds. After machine-mixing for 10s, each of the three increments was irradiated from the top for various times (0-60s). In addition, extra irradiation from the bottom; from the bottom before, and from the side after, ejection from the mould; the same using two curing lamps; and at various delays after mixing (0-18 h), with four replicates of each. After exposure, or as appropriate, specimens were wrapped tightly in aluminium foil for dry storage in the dark at 37 degrees C for testing at 24h after mixing. Specimens with evident defects were replaced before testing. RESULTS: No increase in strength was found beyond the recommended 20-s irradiation, indeed further exposure reduced the strength. For top-only irradiation, strength rose from the unirradiated value (66+/-9 MPa) to a peak at 20s (215+/-25 MPa), after which it declined steadily. Adding bottom irradiation gave a small decrease in peak value (194+/-36 MPa); adding side irradiation reduced it substantially (113+/-7 MPa). Delay for 2 min gave a marked reduction (155+/-15 MPa), declining to the unirradiated value at 18 h (70+/-15 MPa). No effect due to shade was detected. SIGNIFICANCE: Competition between network-forming reactions leads to a sensitive balance between the two, and a critical optimum irradiation: too much may be detrimental, as is delay. The essential compromise involved in such mixed chemistry jeopardizes reliability. It is advisable to follow the duration of exposure prescribed by the manufacturer to achieve optimal performance.     

The influence of finishing time on the marginal seal of a resin-modified glass-ionomer and polyacid-modified resin composite

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of immediate and delayed finishing on the microleakage of encapsulated resin-modified glass-ionomer, Fuji II LC and a polyacid-modified resin composite, Dyract compomer at both the enamel and dentine margins. Standardized Class V cavities were prepared along the cemento-enamel junction on buccal and palatal surfaces of 24 freshly extracted non-carious premolars. Equal numbers of buccal and palatal cavities in each group were restored with Fuji II LC and Dyract compomer following the manufacturer's instructions. The groups with delayed finishing were restored 1 week earlier, stored in saline at 37 degrees C and finished on the same day as the groups with immediate finishing. The specimens were then thermocycled 500 times and subjected to dye penetration testing. The results showed that both materials leaked more at the dentine than enamel margins for both regimes of finishing methods. There was no statistical difference in the microleakage of Dyract finished immediately or later at enamel and dentine margins and Fuji II LC finished immediately or later in dentine. However, a statistical difference existed between the microleakage in Fuji II LC finished immediately and later in enamel.     

Longevity of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement and a polyacid-modified resin composite restoring non-carious cervical lesions in a general dental practice

BACKGROUND: Long-term prospective survival studies of resin-modified glass ionomer cements (RMGICs) and polyacid-modified resin composites (compomers) placed in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) are lacking from general dental practice. Short-term studies have shown an unsatisfactory clinical performance for several materials. METHODS: One practitioner placed 87 compomer (Compoglass, Vivadent-Ivoclar) and 73 encapsulated RMGIC (Fuji II LC, GC Int.) restorations in NCCLs for 61 adults. Compoglass was placed using SCA primer, and Fuji II LC using GC Dentin Conditioner. No cavity preparation was undertaken. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for estimating the cumulative survivals for those restorations that were replaced, with the probability level set at alpha = 0.05 for statistical significance. RESULTS: Restorations were judged unsatisfactory (by the practitioner and the subjects) because of surface and marginal loss of material (68.8 per cent), dislodgement (18.8 per cent) and discoloration (12.4 per cent), these modes being similar for both materials (P = 0.35). Unsatisfactory restorations were replaced in 121 (75.6 per cent) instances. After periods of up to five years, cumulative survival estimates were 14.9 (5.8 Standard Error) per cent for Compoglass and zero per cent for Fuji II LC (P = 0.74). Median survivals were 30 months for Compoglass and 42 months for Fuji II LC. CONCLUSION: Both materials had high long-term unsatisfactory performances when placed in non-prepared NCCLs in a general dental practice.     

Comparative study of the physical properties of a polyacid-modified composite resin and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement.

OBJECTIVES: The physical properties of the resin-modified composite resin Dyract (Detrey Dentsply) and the resin-modified glass ionomer cement Fuji II LC (GC) were compared, and the effect of water sorption on these properties was studied. METHODS: Compressive, diametral compressive and flexural strengths were measured using specimens aged up to three months. The Vickers hardness and the water erosion were also determined. The specimens were stored at 37 degrees C under five different conditions, chosen to vary the water sorption of the samples. The results were analyzed using a multi-factor analysis of variance. RESULTS: Dry specimens of Dyract and Fuji II LC showed similar properties. However, the two materials behaved differently when stored in presence of water. In contrast to Fuji II LC, Dyract showed very little expansion for the first 24 h (1.5 +/- 0.3 and 0.03 +/- 0.01%, respectively), leached small quantities of ions and retained its mechanical strength. Those differences are related to their chemical composition. Fuji II LC is hydrophilic, as it contains polyHEMA. In the presence of water, Fuji II LC behaves like a hydrogel, but the network resulting from the copolymerization of acidic and UDMA monomers is less hydrophilic, and the effect of water on Dyract is retarded. SIGNIFICANCE: The significant properties of Dyract are determined by its composite character. This certainly represents some advantages, for instance, a higher mechanical strength, a better protection against initial dehydration and subsequent water effects. However, Dyract shows some disadvantages over Fuji II LC, like a lower amount of fluoride release or the interference of oxygen during polymerization.     

Two-year evaluation of Class II resin-modified glass ionomer cement/composite open sandwich and composite restorations

Restorations made of a combination of resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) and composite resin (CR) – open sandwich 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 sandwich 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 random 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. Received: 28. January 2000 / Accepted: 8 May 2000     

Conventional versus resin-modified glass-ionomer cement for Class II restorations in primary molars. A 3-year clinical study

Summary. Objective. To compare the clinical performance of two glass‐ionomer cements (GICs)for Class II restorations in primary molars: a conventional cement (Fuji II®) and a resin‐modified cement (Vitremer®). Design. Split mouth and random assignment to the two materials were used for the majority of the molars. Sample and methods. Forty consecutive 4–7‐year‐old children were included. One operator made 115 restorations: 53 with Vitremer and 62 with Fuji II. The restorations were evaluated clinically, radiographically and from colour photographs. Results. The cumulative success rate of the Vitremer restorations was 94% and that of the Fuji II restorations 81%. The difference is statistically significant. The risk of a failed restoration was more than five times higher with Fuji II than with Vitremer as the restorative material. Of the 13 unsuccessful restorations, seven had lost their retention, four had secondary caries, and two were fractured. Conclusions. The resin‐modified GIC offered advantages over the conventional GIC for restoring approximal caries in primary molars.     

Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite in class V carious lesions: 3-year results

This study evaluated the three-year clinical performance of Class V restorations made of a polyacid-modified resin composite, Dyract. Ninety-two Class V carious lesions in 28 patients were restored with Dyract. Restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline, first, second, and third year recall visits, according to the modified Ryge criteria by two experienced, calibrated examiners. Retention rate after three years in Class V carious restorations was 92.4%, with only seven failed restorations. Color change and marginal discoloration in restorations were found to be statistically significant (p = 0.013 and p < 0.001, respectively) at the end of third year, but none of the affected restorations required replacement. The results of this study revealed that at the end of three years, Dyract exhibited good clinical success rate but significant color change and marginal discoloration in Class V carious lesions.     

One-year clinical evaluation of two resin composites, two polymerization methods, and a resin-modified glass ionomer in non-carious cervical lesions

AIM: The aim of this study was to examine clinically relevant data on four restorative procedures for non-carious cervical lesions using United States Public Health Service (USPHS)-compatible clinical and photographic criteria and to compare different methods of analyzing clinical data. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fourteen patients with at least one or two pairs of non-carious lesions under occlusion and a mean age of 50 were enrolled in this study. A total of 56 restorations (14 with each material) were placed by three experienced, calibrated dental practitioners. Two other experienced and calibrated practitioners, under single-blind conditions, followed up on all restorations for a period of one year. Three materials were randomly placed: a micro-hybrid composite with two polymerization methods (G1 and G2), a flowable micro-hydrid composite (G3), and a resin-modified glass ionomer (G4). Statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskall-Wallis test (p<0.05) and a Mann-Whitney U modified test with a corrected significance level. RESULTS: At the one year evaluation time, there were no restorations with secondary caries and the retention rates in G1 (IntenS with a hard polymerization), G2 (IntenS with a soft polymerization), G3 (Filtek flow), and G4 (Fuji II LC) were 85.7% (two losses), 92.8% (one loss), 100%, and 100%, respectively. The total visual comparison of the results at baseline (15 days later) showed significant differences only with the clinical acceptance criterion: G1 was different from G2, with a soft polymerization device (p<0.05). In terms of surface quality at one year, G1, G2, and G3 exhibited a statistically significant difference from G4, p<0.05. The digital analysis at baseline showed significant differences only with the clinical acceptance criterion: G1=G2 was different from G3=G4, p<0.05. At one year, only the microporosity criterion showed any statistical differences: G1=G2=G3 was different from G4, p<0.05. CONCLUSIONS: The resin-modified glass ionomer was easier to use and had a high retention rate, but it failed in terms of surface quality (visual mode) and porosity (digital mode) criteria compared to the others groups. Overall results showed no difference between groups G1 (hard-polymerized) and G2 (soft-polymerized), and only G1 was affected by the marginal edge (p<0.03) and integrity criteria (p<0.02) at one year.     

Two-year clinical comparison of a microfilled and a hybrid resin-based composite in non-carious Class V lesions

The purpose of this double-blind clinical trial was to compare the retention rate in noncarious Class V lesions of two resin-based composite restorative materials with contrasting stiffness. Isolation with retraction cord, pressed paper triangles, and cotton rolls was used to closely mimic the procedures generally used in a practice setting. Thirty pairs of restorations were placed, one using Silux Plus and one using Z100. The assignment of material was randomized, and the subjects were unaware of the material used. All restorations were placed with a fourth-generation adhesive liner, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose. Evaluations were performed at baseline, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months by two independent examiners using criteria developed by Cvar and Ryge in a forced consensus model. Examiners were unaware of the restoration's group identity. No difference between the retention rates for the two groups was found after 24 months, bringing into question the role that a material's stiffness plays in determining retention in a noncarious Class V lesion.