1887

n Journal of Minimum Intervention in Dentistry - Anticariogenic effect of GIC versus composite resin - a brief quantitative systematic overview

USD

 

Abstract

to appraise and present detailed quantitative evidence in answer to the review question, whether glass ionomer cement (GIC) has a higher anticariogenic effect than composite resin.


The trials were identified from a search of the PubMed database on 17 June 2008 using the terms: ("Cariostatic Agents"[Mesh] OR "Dental Caries"[Mesh] OR "Cariostatic Agents "[Pharmacological Action]) AND ("Glass Ionomer Cements"[Mesh] OR "Cermet Cements"[Mesh]) AND ("Composite Resins"[Mesh]). References of accepted articles were checked for additional studies suitable for inclusion.
Relevant to review question; Published in English language; 2- or more arm prospective trial (in-situ, in-vivo).
No computable data for both, test- and control group; not all data from investigated units reported; insufficient random allocation of study subjects; older reports from the same trial.
The systematic literature search found 14 trials in line with the inclusion criteria. Of these, 8 trials could be accepted for review. From the reviewed trials 10 individual datasets were extracted and analysed.
The analysis results of dichotomous data showed no difference in caries incidence on tooth tissue adjacent to these materials. The analysis of continuous data showed significant higher microhardness and significantly less mineral loss of tooth tissue adjacent to GIC after acid attack than tooth tissue adjacent to composite.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/mident/4/5/EJC75769
2011-01-01
2016-12-07
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error