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 .
A randomized trial of resin-based restorations in class I and class II beveled preparations in primary molars: 24-month results.
PURPOSE The authors conducted a r and omized clinical trial to evaluate the survival rate of esthetic restorations in Class I and Class II beveled preparations in primary molars 24 months after placement . The null hypothesis was that there is no difference among survival rates of the restorative material s used . METHODS Forty-eight children ( mean age , 5 years 9 months ) received 141 restorations in beveled cavosurface margins in primary molars r and omly assigned by lottery method : 46 received treatment with Vitremer Tri-Cure Glass Ionomer System ( 3 M ESPE Dental Products , St. Paul , Minn. ) ( 33 Class I and 13 Class II restorations ) , 51 received treatment with Freedom ( SDI , Bayswater , Victoria , Australia ) ( 36 Class I and 15 Class II restorations ) ; 44 received treatment with TPH Spectrum ( Dentsply , Petropolis , Rio de Janeiro , Brazil ) ( 30 Class I and 14 Class II restorations ) . Two examiners whose technique had been calibrated ( weight kappa > 0.85 ) evaluated the restorations using modified U.S. Public Health Service criteria and Visible Plaque Index score at baseline and at 12 , 18 and 24 months . RESULTS After two years , the authors censored data for 17 restorations , considered 101 restorations to be clinical ly successful and deemed 23 restorations failed because of loss of marginal integrity , anatomical form discrepancies and secondary caries . For Class I and Class II restorations , the cumulative survival rates were higher than 80 percent and 55 percent , respectively , for all material s ( life table , Gehan-Wilcoxon Test , P > .05 ; P > .05 ) . CONCLUSIONS At the 24-month clinical recall , the authors found no differences among material s in Class I ( P > .05 ) or Class II beveled preparations ( P > .05 ) in primary molars , but all material s showed higher survival rates in Class I than in Class II restorations
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 .