Studies investigating restorations placed in the primary dentition showed no significant differences between the groups after 12 and 24 months .
In the permanent dentition , the longevity of ART restorations is equal to or greater than that of equivalent amalgam restorations for up to 6.3 years and is site-dependent .
No difference was observed in primary teeth .
The aim was to report on the longevity of  restorations placed using the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach  compared with that of  equivalent placed amalgam restorations .
Survival of glass ionomer restorations placed in primary molars using atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) and conventional cavity preparations: 2-year results.
OBJECTIVE To compare the survival of  glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) restorations placed in a dental clinic setting using both the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach with h and instruments , and conventional cavity preparation with rotary instruments . METHOD AND MATERIAL S Two encapsulated high-strength conventional GICs ( Fuji IX GP , Ketac-Molar Aplicap ) were placed in 82 Class I and 53 Class II preparations and one encapsulated non-gamma 2 amalgam alloy ( GK-amalgam ) was placed in 32 Class I preparations , in the primary molars of 60 Chinese children with a mean age of 7.40 + /- 1.24 ( SD ) years . Thus , 9 treatment groups were formed . RESULTS After two years , there were no significant survival differences found among 7 of the 9 treatment groups ( p = 0.99 ) . However , two groups comprising Fuji IX GP and Ketac-Molar Aplicap placed in Class II cavities prepared using the ART approach showed significantly lower restoration survivals ( p < 0.001 ) . Only 3 of the 72 initially sealed fissures adjacent to the restorations appeared to retain any GIC material . CONCLUSIONS In a clinic setting , both the ART h and instrument and conventional rotary instrument methods were equally suitable for high Class I restoration survival , but not for Class II restoration survival where the conventional cavity preparation method was preferable
Studies investigating restorations placed in the primary dentition showed no significant differences between the groups after 12 and 24 months .
In the permanent dentition , the longevity of ART restorations is equal to or greater than that of equivalent amalgam restorations for up to 6.3 years and is site-dependent .
No difference was observed in primary teeth .
The aim was to report on the longevity of  restorations placed using the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach  compared with that of  equivalent placed amalgam restorations .