Comparation of the Clinical Effects of Glass Ionomer Cement and Flowable Composite Resin on the Restoration of Dental Wedge-Shaped Defects

LU Jiaping,ZHAO Shouliang,XU Peicheng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-6358.2013.03.041
2013-01-01
Abstract:Objective:To compare the clinical effects of glass ionomer cement(GIC) and flowable composite resin(FCR) on the restoration of dental wedge-shaped defects as liners.Methods:A total of 376 teeth from 105 patients with wedge-shaped defects were studied and divided into Group A and Group B randomly with self-contrasted method.The depth of wedge-shaped defects was more than 1 mm and less than 2 mm,and the patients were with dentin hypersensitiveness and without pulpitis.Group A was restored with composite resin after applying flowable composite as a liner in one side,and Group B was filled with composite resin after lined with GIC.The Ryge criteria and United States Public Health Service(USPHS) criteria were used to evaluate postoperative sensitivity and cumulative loss rates of the treatment effects after 1 week,1 month,1 year and 3 years.Results: Postoperative sensitivity after 1 week and 1 month in Group A were 18.3 %(28/153) and 9.2 %(14/153),respectively;and they were 35.9 %(55/153) and 28.1 %(43/153) in Group B,respectively.There was significant difference between the two groups(P all<0.01).There was no significant difference between two groups after 1 year and 3 years.Postoperative cumulative loss rates after 1 year and 3 years in Group A were 9.8 %(15/153),and 11.8 %(18/153),respectively;they were 2.6 %(4/153) and 3.3 %(5/153) in Group B,respectively.There was significant difference between the two groups(P<0.05 and 0.01).But there was no significant difference between the two groups after 1 week and 1 month.Conclusions: Both GIC and FCR are ideal materials for restoration of dental wedge-shaped defects as liners,but GIC has its advantages in anti-postoperative sensitivity,while the FCR has good retention.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?