4.6 Review

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

期刊

DENTAL MATERIALS
卷 39, 期 12, 页码 E1-E17

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2023.10.008

关键词

Glass ionomer cement; Restoration; Caries; Prevention; Systematic review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compares the preventive effect of glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorations with amalgam or resin-composite restorations on secondary caries. The findings suggest that GIC restorations have a better preventive effect against secondary caries compared to amalgam restorations and a similar preventive effect compared to resin-composite restorations in both primary and permanent teeth.
Objective: The objective is to compare the preventive effect on secondary caries of glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorations with amalgam or resin-composite restorations.Methods: Two independent researchers conducted a systematic search of English publications in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane and Scopus. They selected randomized clinical trials comparing secondary caries incidences around GIC restorations (conventional GIC or resin-modified GIC) with amalgam or resin-composite restorations. Meta-analysis of the secondary-caries incidences with risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) as the effect measure was performed.Results: This review included 64 studies. These studies included 8310 GIC restorations and 5857 amalgam or resin-composite restorations with a follow-up period from 1 to 10 years. Twenty-one studies with 4807 restorations on primary teeth and thirty-eight studies with 4885 restorations on permanent teeth were eligible for meta-analysis. The GIC restorations had a lower secondary caries incidence compared with amalgam restorations in both primary dentition [RR= 0.55, 95% CI:0.41-0.72] and permanent dentition [RR= 0.20, 95% CI:0.11-0.38]. GIC restorations showed similar secondary caries incidence compared with resincomposite restorations in primary dentition [RR= 0.92, 95% CI:0.77-1.10] and permanent dentition [RR= 0.77, 95% CI:0.39-1.51]. Conventional GIC restorations showed similar secondary caries incidence compared with resin -modified GIC-restored teeth in both primary dentition [RR= 1.12, 95% CI:0.67-1.87] and permanent dentition [RR= 1.63, 95% CI:0.34-7.84].Conclusions: GIC restorations showed a superior preventive effect against secondary caries compared to amalgam restorations, and a similar preventive effect against secondary caries compared to resin-composite restorations in both primary and permanent teeth. [PROSPERO Registration ID: CRD42022380959]

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