A prospective and randomized clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness of ART restorations with high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement versus conventional restorations with resin composite in Class II cavities of permanent teeth: two-year follow-up

• Published in: Journal of applied oral science Vol. 29; p. e20200609
• Main Authors: Menezes-Silva, Rafael, Velasco, Sofia R Maito, BRESCIANi, Eduardo, Bastos, Roosevelt da Silva, Navarro, Maria Fidela de Lima
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English; Portuguese
• Published: Brazil Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP 01.01.2021; University of São Paulo
• Subjects: Atraumatic restorative treatment; Clinical trial; Composite Resins; Dental Caries; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Dentistry; DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE; Follow-Up Studies; Glass Ionomer Cements; Glass-ionomer cement; Humans; Original; Permanent dentition; Prospective Studies; Resin composite; Viscosity; Resin composite; Clinical trial; Glass-ionomer cement; Permanent dentition; Atraumatic restorative treatment
• ISSN: 1678-7757; 1678-7765; 1678-7765
• DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2020-0609

To compare the effectiveness of ART restorations using High Viscosity Glass-ionomer cement (HVGIC) with conventional restorations using resin composite in Class II cavities of permanent teeth, in a 2-year follow-up. Seventy-seven restorations were made with each restorative material, Equia Fil-GC Corporation (ART restorations) and Z350-3M (conventional restoration), in 54 participants in this parallel and randomized clinical trial. Restorations were evaluated at 6 months, 1 and 2 years using the ART and the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Chi-square test and Survival Analysis (p<0.05) were used for statistical analysis. The success rates for ART restorations were 98.7% (6 months) and 95.8% (1 year) for both criteria. At 2 years, success rate was 92% and 90.3% when scored by the modified USPHS and ART criteria (p=0.466), respectively. The success rates for conventional restorations were 100% (6 months), 98.7% (1 year) and 91.5% (2 years) for both assessment criteria. ART restorations presented a lower survival rate by the criterion of ART (83.7%) when compared to the modified USPHS criterion of (87.8%), after 2 years (p=0.051). The survival of conventional restorations was 90.7% for both evaluation criteria. At the 2-years follow-up evaluation, no statistically significant difference was observed between the success rate of ART restorations with HVGIC compared to conventional restorations with resin composite in Class II cavities of permanent teeth.