Hypermineralization of Dentinal Lesions Adjacent to Glass-ionomer Cement Restorations In situ anticariogenic potential of glass ionomer cement. Influence of Fluoride-Releasing Restorative Material on Root Dentine Secondary Caries in situ Effectiveness of a glass ionomer cement used as a pit and fissure sealant in recently erupted permanent first molars. Inhibition of demineralization adjacent to tooth-colored restorations in primary teeth after 2 in vitro challenges. Clinical evaluation of three restorative materials applied in a minimal intervention caries treatment approach. Retention and caries preventive effects of a GIC and a resin-based fissure sealant. Chemical exchange between glass-ionomer restorations and residual carious dentine in permanent molars: an in vivo study. Caries-preventive Effect of Supervised Toothbrushing and Sealants Evaluating the effects of fluoride-releasing dental materials on adjacent interproximal caries. Effect of glass-ionomer cement lining on postoperative sensitivity in occlusal cavities restored with resin composite--a randomized clinical trial. In vivo inhibition of demineralization around orthodontic brackets. A clinical comparison of glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer and resin composite restorations in the treatment of cervical caries in xerostomic head and neck radiation patients. Demineralization around orthodontic brackets bonded with resin-modified glass ionomer cement and fluoride-releasing resin composite. Restoration of permanent teeth in young rural children in Cambodia using the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique and Fuji II glass ionomer cement. The success rates of a glass ionomer cement and a resin-based fissure sealant placed by fifth-year undergraduate dental students Inhibition of mineral loss at the enamel/sealant interface of fissures sealed with fluoride- and non-fluoride containing dental materials in vitro. Conventional versus resin-modified glass-ionomer cement for Class II restorations in primary molars. A 3-year clinical study. Mineral loss on adjacent enamel glass ionomer cements restorations after cariogenic and erosive challenges. Retention of a glass ionomer cement and a resin-based fissure sealant and effect on carious outcome after 7 years. The effects of two cavity preparation methods on the longevity of glass ionomer cement restorations: an evaluation after 12 months. Long-term clinical evaluation of fracture and pulp injury following glass-ionomer cement or composite resin applied as a base filling in teeth restored with amalgam. Clinical performance and caries inhibition of resin-modified glass ionomer cement and amalgam restorations.
Previous reports have shown a release of fluoride from glass-ionomer cement ( GIC ) restorations into the oral fluids . Fluoride in the ambient fluids has a caries-preventive effect by enhancing remineralization and inhibiting demineralization of the dental hard tissues . Therefore , the current investigation was undertaken to determine whether GIC fillings could contribute to the remineralization of caries lesions in dentin . Small circular preparations were made in disks of dentin which had incipient caries-like lesions in the remaining tissue . The preparations were filled with amalgam or composite material s ( as controls ) or with GIC . The specimens thus contained a restoration close to a dentinal caries-like lesion . The specimens were placed contralaterally in the buccal surfaces of removable partial dentures and were worn intra-orally by volunteers for a 12-week experimental period , after which the specimens were sectioned and analyzed by microradiography . All specimens with GIC restorations exhibited hypermineralization in the tissue bordering the filling and in the wall of the preparation which had been in contact with the restoration . The ( caries-like ) lesions were remineralized , even under conditions of heavy plaque formation . In contrast , specimens with amalgam or composite restorations showed further extensive demineralization . This study demonstrates a significant remineralization potential exerted by the fluoride-releasing GIC restorative material . Consequently , the choice of the restorative material might be crucial for the occurrence or prevention of recurrent caries around restorations The purpose of this study was to compare the amount of fluoride in plaque formed on glass ionomer cement or composite and to evaluate the effects of fluoride released on growth of cariogenic microflora , fluoride uptake , and secondary caries formation under in situ conditions of a high cariogenic challenge . Ten adult volunteers took part in this crossover study performed in two phases of 28 days . Eighty enamel blocks were r and omly restored with glass ionomer cement ( Chelon-Fil-Espe ) or composite ( Silux ) . During each phase of the study , an acrylic resin appliance , containing four enamel blocks restored with the same material , was constructed for each of the volunteers . During the experimental period , all subjects used fluoride-free dentifrice , refrained from brushing the restored enamel blocks , and immersed the appliances into 20 % sucrose solution eight times a day . Fluoride levels , mutans streptococci , and lactobacilli were assessed in dental plaque . Fluoride uptake and microhardness profiles were determined in enamel around the restorations . Statistical analyses indicated a significantly higher level of fluoride ( p < 0.05 ) and a lower level of mutans streptococci plaque formed on glass ionomer cement . Analysis of variance in a split-plot model indicated that in the enamel around the glass ionomer restoration the fluoride uptake was significantly greater ( p < 0.025 ) and the mineral loss significantly lower ( p < 0.01 ) . The results show that glass ionomer cement presents a broad anticariogenic effect and may be of value in preventing secondary caries , even under conditions of a high caries risk The usefulness of fluoride-releasing restorations in  secondary caries prevention may be question ed because of the presence of other common sources of fluoride and because of ageing of the restorations . This study tested the hypothesis that glass-ionomer cement restorations , either aged or unaged , do not prevent secondary root caries , when fluoride dentifrice is frequently used . Sixteen volunteers wore palatal appliances in two phases of 14 days , according to a 2 × 2 crossover design . In each phase the appliance was loaded with bovine root dentine slabs restored with either glass-ionomer or resin composite , either aged or unaged . Specimens were exposed to cariogenic challenge 4 times/day and to fluori date d dentifrice 3 times/day . The fluoride content in the biofilm ( FB ) formed on slabs and the mineral loss ( ΔZ ) around the restorations were analysed . No differences were found between restorative material s regarding the FB and the ΔZ , for either aged ( p = 0.792 and p = 0.645 , respectively ) or unaged ( p = 1.00 and p = 0.278 , respectively ) groups . Under the cariogenic and fluoride dentifrice exposure conditions of this study , the glass-ionomer restoration , either aged or unaged , did not provide additional protection against secondary root caries PURPOSE This study 's purpose was to evaluate the caries-preventive effect of a glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) used as an occlusal sealant on recently erupted permanent first molars . METHODS A double-blind , r and omized , controlled , clinical trial was undertaken that included 36 5- to 8-year-olds ( and 92 permanent first molars ) who were r and omly allocated to the test group ( GIC ) or the control group ( auto-polymerized resin-based sealant [ RBS ] )  . The Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the number of new carious or filled occlusal surfaces in the 2 groups . RESULTS After 6 months , 1 occlusal surface in the test group and 2 occlusal surfaces in the control group showed carious lesions ( P=.15 ) . In the fifth year of follow-up , 2 occlusal surfaces in the test group and 7 occlusal surfaces in the control group were filled or carious ( P=.42 ) , and the mean number of sealed surfaces that became carious or filled was 0.2 ( 95 % confidence interval [CI]=0.02 - 0.70 ) for the GIC-sealed teeth and 0.6 ( 95 % CI=0.20 - 1.30 ) for the RBS-sealed teeth ( P=.30 ) . CONCLUSION High-viscosity glass ionomer cement can provide some level of protection against dental caries when used as a dental sealant in newly erupted permanent first molars PURPOSE As clinical diagnosis of secondary caries is the most common reason for restoration replacement , fluoride-releasing restorative material s have been developed to address this problem . The purpose s of this study were to verify demineralization inhibition produced by 5 restorative material s su bmi tted to two methods of in vitro cariogenic challenge and verify whether these methods influence material behavior by means of polarized light microscopy and microhardness . METHODS Class V cavities were prepared on buccal surfaces of 100 extracted primary molars and r and omly restored with 1 of the 4 fluoride-releasing material s , Fuji IX , Vitremer , Dyract , Tetric Ceram , and Filtek Z250 as control material ( N=10 ) . Specimens were su bmi tted to in vitro caries induction by two different methods , acid gel immersion , and pH cycling . Teeth su bmi tted to gel were then sectioned and prepared for polarized light microscopy in water , while teeth cycled were prepared for microhardness evaluation . RESULTS Polarized light microscopy : Means of demineralization areas ( microm(2 ) ) differed significantly , depending on the restorative material . Tukey 's test revealed the smallest demineralization areas adjacent to Fuji IX and Vitremer restorations , with no difference between them ( P>.05 ) . The greatest demineralization area mean values were verified using Dyract and Filtek Z250 , without differences between them ( P>.05 ) . Microhardness : Glass ionomer cements ( GICs ) performed better on the area of great cariogenic challenge , closer to the surface , than other material s indicating minor mineral loss during pH cycling . The compomer Dyract presented similar performance to GICs and composite resin Tetric Ceram , but it was better than Filtek Z250 . CONCLUSION The experimental model of caries lesion induction may influence material performance . GICs , however , are superior in preventing in vitro demineralization independently of the method OBJECTIVES This paper reports on a longitudinal evaluation of three material s ( glass ionomer , zinc oxide-eugenol cement , and composite ) employed in a minimal restorative intervention approach of 81 high caries-active pregnant women selected for a preventive oral health program in Brazil . The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical behavior of the glass ionomer cement , currently indicated in programs for control of carious lesions . METHODS The patients were r and omly divided into two groups . Both groups were engaged in an oral health promotion approach . In Group 1 , 417 glass ionomer restorations were placed in 43 individuals , involving all types and sizes of cavities . In the second group , 213 posterior zinc oxide-eugenol ( ZOE ) restorations and 127 anterior composite restorations were placed in 38 patients . Minimal cavity preparations were made , in which only soft or infected dentin was removed , on the basis of clinical judgment . RESULTS After two years , the restorations were clinical ly evaluated by two examiners for marginal integrity , amount of wear , presence of fracture , carious lesions , and lost restorations . Statistical analysis ( chi-square test ) identified statistically significant difference between glass ionomer and ZOE ( 90.6 % vs 9.2 % ) . Comparing glass ionomer and composite , similar survival rates were observed . The success rate observed for the glass ionomer cement ranged from 77.1 percent to 92.5 percent , depending on the type and size of cavity in which it was applied . Four teeth restored with glass ionomer cement and one tooth restored with composite showed caries signs . Regarding the ZOE restorations , caries was always associated with other causes of failure such as excessive wear , restoration loss , or marginal defects , with no possibility of separate evaluation . Despite the preventive and therapeutic measurements employed , a mean increase of 2.15 new surfaces with cavities was observed in Group 1 , as well as 2.83 surfaces presenting the same status in Group 2 . CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated that highly viscous glass ionomer cement applied in a minimal intervention approach provided high- quality preventive and restorative care after two years to a population at high risk for caries . The composite was employed in cavities exposed to lower stress , such as in the anterior teeth , and its behavior was comparable to that of the glass ionomer cement . The reinforced ZOE presented a high failure rate , thus contraindicating its use for such purpose Abstract Fissure sealing using partially filled resins is an established caries preventive practice . Glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) sealants may offer additional advantages due to their ability to bond chemically to enamel and release fluoride . The aim of this study was to compare the caries preventive effect and retention of a GIC and a resin-based sealant . Ketac-fil ® was tested against a chemically cured resin-based material ( Delton ® ) using a split mouth design . Perth ( Western Australia ) schoolchildren ( n= 465 ) , mean age 7 yr±0.72 ( S.D. ) , received sealants  on the occlusal surfaces of sound homologous permanent first molar pairs .  Test ( GIC ) and control ( resin ) sealants were systematic ally allocated to left and right sides based on the child 's month of birth , and were placed by dental therapists . After 3.64±0.11 yr , 415 children were examined by different clinicians , and the clinical status of the teeth and the extent of sealant retention recorded . Sealants were deemed retained when at least 2/3 of the fissure pattern was still sealed . In 252 tooth pairs , neither sealant was retained to this extent . In 71 pairs , the GIC was not retained and the resin sealant retained . In 40 pairs the reverse occurred ( McNemar 's test , χ2= 8.66 , P < 0.005 ) . Net gain ( additional lesions prevented by the test agent per 100 treatments ) was 6.1%(95 % CI 3.3 % , 8.9 % ) . Effectiveness of the GIC was 80.6 % ( 95 % CI 59.6 % , 90.7 % ) . The relative risk of caries in test teeth was 0.19 ( 95 % CI 0.09 , 0.40 ) . The study suggests that complete retention of GIC sealant is not necessary for caries prevention in newly erupted permanent first molars OBJECTIVE To evaluate the remineralization of carious dentine following the restoration of an extensive lesion in a permanent molar with a high strength glass-ionomer cement ( GIC ) .  MATERIAL S AND METHODS Thirteen first permanent molars , which were scheduled for extraction because of the presence of extensive caries lesions , were selected for this study . They were first restored , according to the ART technique , using encapsulated Fuji IX(GP ) , which contains a strontium glass rather than the traditional calcium glass . The cavities were prepared with a clean enamel margin and minimal removal of the carious dentine around the walls . After a period of 1 - 3 months they were harvested and subsequently sectioned and examined using an electron probe micro analysis ( EPMA ) and scanning electron microscopy ( SEM ) . RESULTS EPMA demonstrated that both fluorine and strontium ions had penetrated deep into the underlying demineralized dentine . The only possible source of these ions was the GIC restoration . CONCLUSION The pattern of penetration of the fluorine and strontium ions into the dentine was consistent with a remineralization process To investigate the effectiveness of 3 caries-preventive measures on high– and low – caries risk occlusal surfaces of first permanent molars over 3 y. This cluster-r and omized controlled clinical trial covered 242 schoolchildren , 6 to 7 y old , from low socioeconomic areas . At baseline , caries risk was assessed at the tooth surface level , through a combination of ICDAS II ( International Caries Detection and Assessment System ) and fissure depth codes . High – caries risk occlusal surfaces were treated according to daily supervised toothbrushing ( STB ) at school and 2 sealants : composite resin ( CR ) and atraumatic restorative treatment – high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement ( ART-GIC ) . Low – caries risk occlusal surfaces received STB or no intervention . Evaluations were performed after 0.5 , 1 , 2 , and 3 y. A cavitated dentine carious lesion was considered a failure . Data were analyzed according to the proportional hazard rate regression model with frailty correction , Wald test , analysis of variance , and t test , according to the jackknife procedure for calculating st and ard errors . The cumulative survival rates of cavitated dentine carious lesion – free , high – caries risk occlusal surfaces were 95.6 % , 91.4 % , and 90.2 % for STB , CR , and ART-GIC , respectively , over 3 y , which were not statistically significantly different . For low – caries risk occlusal surfaces , no statistically significant difference was observed between the cumulative survival rate of the STB group ( 94.8 % ) and the no-intervention group ( 92.1 % ) over 3 y. There was neither a difference among STB , CR , and ART-GIC on school premises in preventing cavitated dentine carious lesions in high – caries risk occlusal surfaces of first permanent molars nor a difference between STB and no intervention for low – caries risk occlusal surfaces of first permanent molars over 3 BACKGROUND The authors examined several restorative material s to evaluate their ability to inhibit demineralization and enhance remineralization of incipient carious lesions on the interproximal enamel of teeth adjacent to those restored with the material s. METHODS Twenty-one subjects in need of a crown on a m and ibular molar and a Class II inlay on an adjacent tooth took part in this six-phase study . Artificial enamel lesions were created and positioned within the interproximal portion of a crown . Lesions were photographed with polarized light microscopy and characterized before and after 30-day intraoral exposures . Each phase included the placement of a new section in the crown model and a new Class II inlay restorative material in the adjacent tooth . RESULTS Results demonstrated that nonfluori date d resin composite , fluori date d resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer restorative material s , when placed in subjects who brushed with a fluori date d dentifrice , demonstrated significantly ( P < .05 ) less enamel demineralization than the nonfluori date d resin composite control placed in subjects who brushed with a nonfluori date d dentifrice . The resin-modified glass ionomer cement , however , even when brushed with a nonfluori date d dentifrice , exhibited significantly ( P < .05 ) less demineralization than the nonfluori date d resin composite control brushed with a nonfluori date d dentifrice . CONCLUSIONS Resin-modified glass ionomer cement appears to significantly inhibit demineralization of interproximal enamel of teeth adjacent to those restored with the material . CLINICAL IMPLICATION S Resin-modified glass ionomer cement restorations can enhance prevention of enamel demineralization on adjacent teeth This study investigated the ability of a glass-ionomer cement ( GIC ) lining to reduce postoperative sensitivity in occlusal cavities restored with resin composite . In addition , the effects of a total-etch and self-etch adhesive on postoperative sensitivity were also compared . Patients who had moderate to deep occlusal caries of at least one molar were recruited . Overall , 103 restorations were placed in 70 participants , with an average age of 22.8 + /- 3.8 years . Preoperatively , each tooth was evaluated for cold-stimulated tooth sensitivity using a visual analog scale . If present , tooth sensitivity induced by cold/hot drinks or occlusal function was also noted . Caries was stained with a caries detector dye , then removed using slow-speed burs and h and excavators . The cavity was restored with one of four r and omly allocated restorative procedures : 1 ) bonded with a two-step , total-etch adhesive ( Single Bond 2 ) ; 2 ) lined with a resin-modified GIC liner ( Fuji Lining LC ) , then bonded with total-etch adhesive ; 3 ) bonded with a two-step , self-etch adhesive ( Clearfil SE Bond ) and 4 ) lined with the GIC liner , then bonded with self-etch adhesive . The cavities were incrementally filled with a nanofilled hybrid resin composite . At recall , postoperative sensitivity was evaluated at one week and one month . Overall , postoperative sensitivity in daily function was rare . No significant difference in postoperative sensitivity , either in daily function or in response to a cold stimulus , was observed between the restorative procedures with or without the GIC liner , regardless of the adhesive used ( p > 0.05 ) . In addition , no difference in postoperative sensitivity was noted between use of the self-etch and total-etch adhesive Demineralization around orthodontic appliances is a problem . Suboptimal oral hygiene , long intervals between appointments , and potentially poor patient cooperation with using fluoride dentifrices and mouth rinses necessitate a compliance-free means of preventing tooth decay . The hypothesis of this study was that fluoride released by glass ionomer cement inhibits the formation of carious lesions around orthodontic brackets in vivo . Brackets were bonded on 2 first premolars in 21 r and omized , consecutively selected patients 11 to 18 years old . Eleven test-group subjects were bonded with fluoride-releasing glass ionomer cement , and 10 control subjects were bonded with composite resin ( no fluoride ) . The teeth were extracted after 4 weeks , sectioned , and evaluated quantitatively by cross-sectional microhardness testing . Fluoride levels in patient saliva were measured by the Taves diffusion method in sample s taken at days 0 ( baseline ) , 1 , 2 , 3 , 7 , 14 , 21 , and 28 to determine whether fluoride from the glass ionomer cement influenced the overall intraoral fluoride levels . The results demonstrated significantly more demineralization around the brackets of the control patients ( P < .01 , Wilcoxon signed rank test ) . For whole-mouth salivary fluoride levels , no significant overall difference between the groups ( P > .05 ) and no noticeable trend within groups ( P > .05 ) were found . These results indicate that using fluoride-releasing glass ionomer cement for bonding orthodontic brackets successfully inhibited caries in vivo . This cariostatic effect was localized to the area around the brackets and was statistically significant after 4 weeks Controversy exists as to whether there is less secondary caries at the margins of glass ionomer restorations compared with other material s that do not release fluoride . This study examined the incidence of secondary caries for three types of restorative material s in Class V restorations in xerostomic patients . The study group consisted of 45 high caries-risk adult patients who had undergone head and neck irradiation for the treatment of cancer . All were substantially xerostomic and in need of at least three restorations in the same arch . Every patient received a restoration with each of the test material s , a conventional glass ionomer ( GI ) , a resin modified glass ionomer ( RMGI ) and a resin composite ( C ) . Patients were instructed in the daily use of a neutral pH sodium fluoride gel in custom trays . Recall appointments were made at 6 , 12 , 18 and 24 months , and the restorations were examined for material loss , marginal integrity and recurrent caries at the restoration margin . Fluoride compliance was determined at each recall period and recorded as the percentage of recommended use during that interval . Patients were categorized at the end of the study as fluoride non-users if their average compliance was 50 % or less . Those with greater than 50 % compliance were categorized as fluoride users . In the latter group , no recurrent caries was found for any of the restorations , whereas a material -dependent incidence of recurrent caries was found in the fluoride non-user group . None of the GI , one RMGI and eight C restorations failed due to recurrent caries . For the fluoride non-user patients , Fishers exact test ( p=0.05 ) showed no statistical difference between GI and RMGI but statistical differences were found among those material s and resin composite at each recall period . Recurrent caries reductions for GI and RMGI relative to C were greater than 80 % in xerostomic patients not using topical fluoride supplementation PURPOSE Enamel demineralization adjacent to orthodontic brackets is one of the risks associated with orthodontic treatment . Glass ionomer cements have been shown to decrease enamel demineralization adjacent to brackets and b and s but do not exhibit bond strengths comparable to resin composites . The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare a fluoride-releasing resin composite versus a resin-modified glass ionomer cement for inhibition of enamel demineralization surrounding orthodontic brackets . METHODS Forty-five teeth were r and omly assigned to 3 groups of 15 teeth . Fifteen were bonded with Concise ( 3 M ) , a non-fluoride-releasing resin composite ( control ) ; 15 teeth were bonded with Light Bond ( Reliance ) , a fluoride-releasing resin composite ; and 15 teeth were bonded with Fuji Ortho LC ( GC Corporation ) , a resin-modified glass ionomer cement . The teeth were placed in an artificial caries solution to create lesions . Following sectioning of the teeth in a buccolingual direction , polarized light microscopy was utilized to evaluate enamel demineralization adjacent to the orthodontic bracket . The area of the lesion was measured 100 microns from the orthodontic bracket and bonding agent . RESULTS MANOVA ( P < .0001 ) and Duncan 's test ( P < .05 ) indicated the resin-modified glass ionomer cement ( Fuji Ortho LC ) and the fluoride-releasing resin composite ( Light Bond ) had significantly less adjacent enamel demineralization than the non-fluoride-releasing resin composite control . However , there was no significant difference between the resin-modified glass ionomer cement and the fluoride-releasing resin composite . CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of this in vitro study , it can be concluded that Fuji Ortho LC and Light Bond exhibit significant inhibition of adjacent demineralization compared to the non-fluoride-releasing control UNLABELLED Several recent studies have demonstrated the success of the ART ( atraumatic restorative treatment ) technique under field conditions in developing countries . The ART technique involves removal of caries using only h and instruments , and placing a glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) restoration . OBJECTIVES To estimate the longevity of Fuji II GIC ART restorations placed in permanent teeth by dental nurse students under field conditions in rural Cambodia . DESIGN Clinical field trial . SETTING One high school in rural Cambodia . SAMPLE AND METHODS 53 subjects between the ages of 12 and 17 who had dental caries were selected to participate . Subjects were r and omly assigned to a dental nurse student for cavity preparation and placement of ART restorations ( without cavity conditioning ) . RESULTS 92.1 % of the carious lesions required class I or class V restorations , and 85.4 % were in the lower molars . 89 teeth were filled . At 1 and 3 years 86.4 % and 79.5 % of restorations were still present . Restorations were assessed by one dentist according to st and ard criteria . 76.3 % of the restorations were judged to be successful at 1 year , and 57.9 % at 3 years . CONCLUSIONS Factors which may have affected the success rates included : the material used , technical factors , failure to condition the cavity prior to restoration , and inexperience of the operators . The results suggest that ART restorations in permanent teeth using Fuji II GIC are only moderately successful after 3 years . Better results could be expected by using a dentine conditioner in conjunction with one of the newer stronger glass ionomer cements AIM : To evaluate retention and caries prevention of a glass-ionomer cement ( GIC ) and a resin-based fissure sealant placed by fifth-year undergraduate dental students . METHODS : The study was conducted according to a split-mouth , r and omised clinical trial . Children with at least one pair of caries-free permanent first molars with deep pits and fissures were included in the study . The children were selected from a population that had a high risk for dental caries .  Sealant material s were applied by fifth-year undergraduate dental students on 346  fissures of the first permanent molars in 173 children . The ages of the children ranged from 7–15 years ( mean 9.4 ) . Two research ers at the clinics supervised all of the procedures . Intra-examiner reproducibility and inter-examiner reproducibility were 0.90 and 0.86 , respectively , for the clinical assessment of sealant retention and caries evaluation . RESULTS :  GIC sealants were completely lost in 31.9 % and resin-based sealants in 16.6 % ( p<0.05 ) . The total retention rates of GIC sealants and resin-based sealants were 13.8 % and 20.8 % , respectively . After 24 months , the caries increment was 3.4 % for GIC sealants and 4.8 % for resin-based sealants ( p>0.05 ) . CONCLUSIONS : The retention of GIC sealants was markedly inferior to the retention of resin-based sealants ; however , GIC when used as a pit and fissure sealant was slightly more effective in preventing occlusal caries OBJECTIVE In this in vitro study we evaluated the enamel mineral loss effect of  fluoride-containing and non-fluoride-containing material s at different distances from the sealant margin , and verified the fluoride-releasing capability of these material s. MATERIAL AND METHODS Extracted molars were r and omly assigned into nine groups ( n = 12 ) :  Concise ( C ) , FluroShield ( F ) , Helioseal Clear Chroma ( H ) , Vitremer ( V ) , Fuji II-LC ( FII ) , Ketac Molar ( KM ) , Fuji IX ( FIX ) , Single Bond ( SB ) , and Clearfil Protect Bond ( CF ) . All groups were subjected to thermo and pH cycling . Enamel mineral loss was evaluated by cross-section micro-hardness analysis at distances : -100 microm , 0 microm , 100 microm , 200 microm . The mineral loss data were analyzed using a multi-factor ANOVA with split-plot design , and fluoride-released data were su bmi tted to ANOVA and Tukey tests . RESULTS FIX demonstrated a lower mineral loss than C , F , and H , but did not differ from the SB , CF , V , FII , and KM groups , which also demonstrated no difference among them . C , F , H , and V presented the highest mineral loss , with no difference among them . V did not differ from the other groups ( p > 0.05 ) . Regarding the different distances from the sealant margin , -100 microm presented the lowest mineral loss . FIX showed the highest fluoride release on the 7th and 14th days of evaluation , while CF showed high fluoride release only on the 7th day . CONCLUSION Resin sealant did not prevent enamel mineral loss , contrary to glass-ionomer cement , which showed the highest capacity for fluoride release . It is not exclusively the presence of fluoride in a material 's composition that indicates its capability to interfere with the development of enamel caries-like lesions OBJECTIVE To compare the clinical performance of two glass-ionomer cements (GICs)for  Class II restorations in primary molars : a conventional cement ( Fuji II ) and a resin-modified cement ( Vitremer ) . DESIGN Split mouth and r and om assignment to the two material s were used for the majority of the molars . SAMPLE AND METHODS Forty consecutive 4 - 7-year-old children were included . One operator made 115 restorations : 53 with Vitremer and 62 with Fuji II . The restorations were evaluated clinical ly , radiographically and from colour photographs . RESULTS The cumulative success rate of the Vitremer restorations was 94 % and that of the Fuji II restorations 81 % . The difference is statistically significant . The risk of a failed restoration was more than five times higher with Fuji II than with Vitremer as the restorative material . Of the 13 unsuccessful restorations , seven had lost their retention , four had secondary caries , and two were fractured . CONCLUSIONS The resin-modified GIC offered advantages over the conventional GIC for restoring approximal caries in primary molars OBJECTIVES the purpose of this study was to determine the mineral loss on surrounding enamel restored with glass ionomer cements ( GIC ) after erosive and cariogenic challenges . METHODS Bovine enamel specimens were r and omly assigned into six groups according to the restorative material : G1 - composite resin ; G2 - high viscous GIC ; G3 - resin-modified glass ionomer with nanoparticles ; G4 - encapsulated resin-modified GIC ; G5 - encapsulated high viscous GIC ; G6 - resin-modified GIC . After restorative procedures , half of specimens in each group were su bmi tted to caries challenge using a pH cycling model for 5 days , and the other half were su bmi tted to erosive challenge in citric acid for 10 min . Before and after the challenges , surface Knoop microhardness assessment s were performed and mineral changes were calculated for adjacent enamel at different distances from restorative margin . RESULTS Data were compared for significant differences using two-way ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls tests ( p<0.05 ) . Erosive challenge significantly reduced enamel surface hardness , but no significant difference was observed irrespectively restorative material s ( p>0.05 ) . The cariogenic challenge promoted a higher surface hardness loss for the resin-modified GIC ( G4 ) and only for the High viscous GIC ( G2 ) an increase in surface hardness was observed . For enamel analyses , significant differences were observed with respect to the different material s ( p<0.001 ) and distances ( p=0.023 ) . Specimens restored with the composite resin presented higher mineral loss and specimens restored with the conventional high viscous GIC and the encapsulated resin-modified GIC presented the lowest values for mineral loss . CONCLUSION The GICs exerts protective effect only for cariogenic challenge The aim of this study was to compare the retention and caries preventive efficacy of glass ionomer ( Fuji III ; GIC ) and light-cured resin-based ( Delton ; LCR ) fissure sealants .  One hundred and sixty-six 5 - 14-year-old schoolchildren received sealants on their newly erupted first or second molars ; a split mouth design was used . Previously reported 2-year results showed low retention rates for GIC sealants , but no difference in the caries increment between the groups . The same persons were invited to a dental check-up 6.1 to 7.8 ( mean 7.1 ) years after the application of sealants ;  111 persons ( 66.8 % of the original group ) participated in the study . The retention of sealants , and the caries status of occlusal surfaces and adjacent proximal surfaces was recorded . On the sealed occlusal surfaces , 10 % of GIC and 45 % of LCR sealants were totally and 9 % of GIC and 20 % of LCR sealants partially present . Twenty-three ( 23.5 % ) of the occlusal surfaces sealed with GIC and 16 ( 16.5 % ) of those sealed with LCR were carious or filled . Compared to LCR sealants , the effectiveness of GIC sealants  was -44 % ( 95 % CI -71 % , -16 % ) and net gain -7 % ( 95 % CI -18 % , 4 % ) . The relative risk of caries occurring was 1.44 ( 95 % CI 0.96 , 2.14 ) BACKGROUND The authors undertook a study to evaluate the effect of two cavity preparation methods on the initial survival of two more-viscous glass ionomer cements , or GICs , placed in the occlusal surfaces of permanent molar teeth . METHODS Three dentists placed 149 restorations in 68 adult patients in a hospital clinic . They used either atraumatic restorative treatment , or ART , or conventional cavity preparation methods to place two encapsulated esthetic conventional GICs : Fuji IX GP ( GC International Corp. , Tokyo ) and Ketac-Molar Aplicap ( 3 M ESPE , Seefeld , Germany ) . For comparison , they used high-copper-content GK Amalgam Alloy ( Advanced Technology & Material s Co. Ltd. , Beijing ) in conventional preparations . They evaluated the restorations using both direct and indirect observation methods . RESULTS Cavity preparations for which the authors used ART h and instruments took approximately twice as long to complete as did those for which they used conventional rotary instruments . After 12 months , no restorations had failed , but restorations comprising both GICs showed early losses of adjacent sealant material . Both GICs also showed relatively high restoration wear . At 12 months , the mean cumulative net occlusal wear for Fuji IX GP was 77 + /- 47 micrometers , and for Ketac-Molar 83 + /- 51 microm , without statistical significance ( P > .05 ) . Color matching improved significantly with time ( P < .001 ) , without significant differences in color between the two GICs by 12 months ( P = .09 ) . The amalgam alloy had minor surface tarnishing and marginal discrepancies increased with time ( P < .00 1 ) . CONCLUSIONS All of the occlusal restorations were rated as satisfactory after 12 months . The method of cavity preparation did not affect the restoration performance of the GICs . However , their deterioration requires long-term monitoring . Clinical Implication s. The more viscous GICs appear initially suitable for restricted use in clinical practice when placed using either of two cavity preparation methods in the occlusal surfaces of permanent molar teeth in adults The aim of this research was to analyse the long-term clinical behaviour of two dental material s applied as filling under  silver amalgam restorations  : glass-ionomer cement ( GIC ) and composite resin with adhesive system ( CR ) . In this study , 117 posterior teeth ( 29 premolars and 88 molars ) were selected with carious lesions which result ed in great loss of dentin and cusps with unsupported enamel . After caries removal , cavities were prepared and totally filled with GIC or with CR . In a following visit , new cavities were prepared , leaving the employed filling material as a base and support for the enamel , which were then restored with silver amalgam . Restorations were evaluated periodically after 6 months and up to 5 years . Both fracture and pulpal involvement rates were low . Although differences could be observed in the behaviour of the material s , statistical survival estimation showed that the performances of GIC and CR as filling material were similar . There was a significant association both between kind of tooth ( molar or premolar ) and long-term survival of the restorations ; and between degree of unsupported enamel and the same long-term survival . Our results confirmed that the technique in which GIC or CR are used as filling under  silver amalgam restorations is clinical ly acceptable BACKGROUND The authors clinical ly examined two restorative material s to evaluate their effectiveness in Class II restorations in primary molars and their ability to inhibit recurrent caries . METHODS Forty subjects , each in need of two Class II restorations in primary molars , took part in this study . Each patient received one  Class II restoration of resin-modified glass ionomer cement and one of amalgam . The authors evaluated the restorations at six-month , one-year , two-year and three-year recall appointments . On exfoliation , teeth with experimental restorations were retrieved and microscopically examined for inhibition of demineralization at restoration margins . RESULTS The results of the clinical evaluation demonstrated no significant differences between the resin-modified glass ionomer cement restorations and the amalgam restorations ( P < .05 ) . Polarized light microscopic examination of the returned teeth that were restored as a part of this study indicated that the resin-modified glass ionomer cement had significantly less enamel demineralization at restoration margins than did amalgam ( P < .0001 ) . CONCLUSIONS The resin-modified glass ionomer cement functioned clinical ly as well as amalgam for Class II restorations in primary molars . However , the resin-modified glass ionomer exhibited significantly less enamel demineralization at restoration margins than did amalgam . CLINICAL IMPLICATION S Resin-modified glass ionomer cement restorative material functions well for Class II restorations in primary molars and exhibits less recurrent caries at restoration margins than does amalgam
AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATION S Because new caries lesions in the margins of restorations are the main reason for failure and replacement of restorations in primary teeth , it is important to know whether there is a benefit in using GICs in both occlusal and occlusoproximal cavities
BACKGROUND Fluoride released from glass ionomer cements ( GICs ) is capable of preventing caries lesions .
However , the preventive effect in margins of occlusal and occlusoproximal restorations have not been proved .