4.6 Review

The preventive effect of glass ionomer restorations on new caries formation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY
卷 125, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104272

关键词

Glass ionomer cement; Resin-modified glass ionomer cement; Caries prevention; Fluoride; Systematic review

资金

  1. Health and Medical Research Fund (HMRF) , Food and Health Bureau (FHB) of Hong Kong SAR, China [09200926]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorations are more effective in preventing caries compared to other types of restorations. Conventional GIC restorations showed a better preventive effect on new caries in primary dentition compared to resin-modified GIC and amalgam restorations. Resin-modified GIC restorations showed a similar preventive effect on new caries compared to composite resin restorations in primary and permanent dentitions.
Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorations on preventing new caries in primary or permanent dentitions compared with other types of restorations. Data: Randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating caries experience increment or caries incidence in patients with GIC restorations, including conventional GIC (CGIC) and resin-modified GIC (RMGIC) restorations, were included. Sources: A systematic search of publications in English was conducted in PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus databases. Study selection/results: This review included 10 studies reporting caries preventive effect of GIC restorations and selected 5 studies for meta-analysis. Patients with GIC restorations showed lower caries incidence compared with other restorations in primary and permanent dentition [RR=0.67, 95% CI:0.55-0.82, p < 0.0001]. Patients with CGIC restorations showed lower caries incidence compared with amalgam restorations [RR=0.57, 95% CI:0.43-0.76, p = 0.0001] and RMGIC restorations [RR=0.70, 95% CI:0.56-0.87, p = 0.002], but no statistical difference with composite resin restorations [RR=0.73, 95% CI:0.51-1.04, p = 0.08] in primary dentition. Patients with RMGIC restorations showed no statistical differences of caries incidence compared with composite resin restorations in primary and permanent dentition [RR=0.83, 95% CI:0.56-1.22, p = 0.33]. Conclusions: GIC restorations presented a better preventive effect on new caries than other restorations did in primary and permanent dentitions. CGIC restorations presented a better caries preventive effect on new caries than RMGIC and amalgam restorations in primary dentitions did. RMGIC restorations showed similar preventing effect on new caries with composite resin restorations in primary and permanent dentitions. Clinical significance: This review affirmed the potential of GIC in preventing new caries development in the dentition.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据