Survival of glass ionomer restorations placed in primary molars using atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) and conventional cavity preparations: 2-year results

Survival estimates of atraumatic restorative treatment versus traditional restorative treatment: a systematic review with meta-analyses

Objectives The hypothesis tested was that there is no significant difference between the survival estimates of atraumatic restorative treatment/high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (ART/HVGIC) restorations, in posterior primary and permanent teeth, and traditional amalgam and resin composite restorations.Data sources The databases PubMed, DOAJ, LILACS, IndMed, Google Scholar and CNKI were searched.Data selection Using inclusion and exclusion criteria led to 14 eligible randomised trials. A low risk of bias was observed for two reports. Homogeneity was obtained for single-surface ART restorations after one and two years in the primary dentition.Data synthesis No statistically significant difference was found between the weighted mean survival percentages of ART/HVGIC and traditional treatments in both single- and multiple-surface restorations in primary molars and in single-surface restorations in posterior permanent teeth at years 1, 2, 3 and 5. At years 4.3 and 6.3, the difference between the two treatments was statistically significant, favouring the ART/HVGIC restorations. No statistically significant difference was found between the weighted mean survival percentages of ART/HVGIC and traditional treatments in multiple-surface restorations in posterior permanent teeth.Conclusion The ART method using HVGICs can be considered as a replacement for traditional restorations in single- and multiple-surface cavities in primary molars, and in single-surface cavities in posterior permanent teeth, particularly for amalgam.

Should atraumatic restorative treatment be the preferred treatment for older patients?

Design Randomised controlled trial study.Case selection Ninety-nine subjects were chosen from 219 potential subjects. The 99 who met the inclusion criteria were randomly allocated to two treatment groups: atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) and conventional treatment (CT). To be selected, patients needed to be 65 years or over, follow oral hygiene guidance and have one or more painless dentinal carious lesions. To establish suitability, a full dental examination was performed by two calibrated dentists. Prior to receiving ART or CT, all participants received standard dental care (including extractions, non-surgical treatment and oral hygiene instructions). Following ART or CT, a dental nurse collected data regarding patient treatment preferences and a calibrated independent dentist, blind to the treatment allocation, reviewed restorations six months, one year, two years and five years after treatment.Data analysis The Cox proportional-hazards (PH) model was used to assess the cumulative survival of the variables ART and CT between the intervals. Bootstrapping was employed to estimate standard errors since the multiple restorations required by many patients were not necessarily independent of each other.Results Of the 99 subjects included, only 28 (ART: 15, CT: 13) remained after five years. After five years, of the 300 restorations undertaken, 15 ART restorations and 16 CT restorations failed. The cumulative probability of restoration survival was 85% and 79% (p = 0.8095) for ART and CT, respectively, with the Cox PH model showing the treatment used had no effect on the restorations' survival.Conclusions No significant difference was noted between the treatment methods used in terms of survival of the restorations. However, it is worth noting that 64.5% of participants preferred to have dental treatment without local anaesthesia and 71.1% without the use of a dental drill. Therefore, ART was a favourable treatment option in older patients, particularly those unable to attend the dental surgery.

A comparative survival analysis of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative treatment technique in primary molars: A randomized clinical trial

Background:

This randomized clinical trial (RCT) aimed to compare the 3-year survival rates of high viscosity glass ionomer restorations (HVGIC) using conventional cavity preparation and atraumatic restorative technique (ART) in primary molars.

Materials and Methods:

In this RCT, 139 schoolchildren aged 6–9 years with dentinal caries in primary molars were randomly allocated to groups, i.e. the ART group and the conventional group, utilizing a random number generator. Adequate allocation concealment was done. Intervention was delivered using standard procedure and GC Fuji IX ART HVGIC was used as restorations in both the groups. Analysis was carried in 92 participants, and survival rates in both the groups were compared at 12, 24, and 36-month intervals. IBM SPSS software was utilized to analyze the time taken for the procedure and the Kaplan–Meier estimate was used to assess the survival rates. P value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

The ART took longer to complete (16.48 ± 2.02 min) versus conventional rotary instrumentation (13.15 ± 1.32 min). The conventional method was slightly superior as compared to ART; excellent survival rates (i.e. >90%) were achieved in both groups at the end of 12-month follow-up with no significant differences at the end of 24 and 36 months as evident from Kaplan–Meier estimate (P = 0.255).

Conclusion:

Three-year follow-up showed that GIC restorations with ART and conventional method carried out using GC Fuji IX ART HVGIC were acceptably successful, substantiating the use of ART for the primary dentition in areas with high caries prevalence and limited access to dental care.

Factors affecting success rate of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Aim of this systematic review was to summarize the factors that affect the success rate of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations in children.

DATA/SOURCES

Two independent reviewers conducted a literature search in the databases PubMed, Medline and Web of Science until October 2019 with no initial time limit. Articles reporting on clinical outcomes of ART restorations placed in children were included.

STUDY SELECTION

A total of 67 articles were included in this review reporting on clinical outcomes of ART restorations placed in children in 47 studies. The overall estimated success rate and 95 % confidence interval (CI) of ART restorations were 0.71 (0.65-0.77) and 0.67 (0.56-0.78) at the 12-month and the 24-month follow-up, respectively. Operator was one of the significant factors associated with the success rate of ART restorations. ART restorations placed by dental students/therapists had a significantly lower success rate compared with those placed by dentists. Besides, type of restoration (single-surface vs. multiple-surface restoration) was also associated with the success rate of ART restorations. Other factors including dentition, restorative material, clinical setting, and moisture control method had no significant influence on the success rate of ART restorations in children.

CONCLUSION

It is concluded that ART approach can be used to manage cavitated caries lesions in children. Operator and type of restoration are significant factors influencing the success rate of ART restorations.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This study provides valuable information on the factors that affect success rate of ART restorations in children, which helps clinicians to make informed decisions on provision of ART restorations in children.

Success rate of proximal tooth-coloured direct restorations in primary teeth at 24 months: a meta-analysis

The aim was to determine the survival of tooth-coloured restorative materials in proximal restorations of primary teeth at 24 months of follow-up and the influence of the following variables: use of coating, use of cavity conditioner, use of rubber dam isolation, the cavity form, the dentist's experience and the methodological characteristics of the studies. We conducted a search until May 2019, obtaining 16 articles from which 30 independent studies were extracted, which were considered as units of analysis. Four outcome measures were extracted from each study: retention, marginal integrity, anatomic form, and absence of recurrent caries. Separate meta-analyses were carried for each outcome and multiple meta-regression model was applied. The outcomes with the highest mean success rates were absence of recurrent caries and anatomic form. The type of material significantly influenced success rates. The best materials were resin-based material plus total-etching adhesion and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), and the worst high viscosity glass ionomer cement (HVGIC). Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) had a lower success rate than the conventional cavity form. RMGIC had the best clinical performance and HVGIC the worst. The form of the cavity, blinding and the experience of the operator were the variables that influenced success rates. Proximal primary molar restorations should be performed with RMGIC as it combines good mechanical performance of the resins together with the prevention of secondary caries of glass ionomers.

Scientific evidence for the management of dentin caries lesions in pediatric dentistry: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A systematic quantitative evaluation of the available evidence of the treatment for caries lesions in primary teeth that considers how different caries progressions lead to the need for distinct interventions might provide additional useful information for clinical evidence-based decision making. The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to verify the effect of the treatments on caries lesion arrestment (CLA) or the success rate (SR) of dentin caries lesion treatments in the primary teeth.

METHODS

A search was conducted using the MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases through December 2017. The primary search terms used in combination were primary teeth, caries lesion and restoration. The grey literature was also screened, as were the reference lists of eligible studies. A search of prospective studies with at least 12 months of follow up that compared different techniques was performed. The exclusion criteria were the absence of a comparison group; no evaluation of different restorative techniques; the evaluation of other outcomes unrelated to this review; and the recruitment of specific patient. The risk of bias was evaluated by the tools: the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and ROBINS-I. A network meta-analyses and meta-analyses were conducted considering CLA or SR as outcomes according to the surface involved and the depth of progression.

RESULTS

Of the 1671 potentially eligible studies, 15 were included. For occlusal surfaces, only two studies presented data regarding the outer half of the dentin, with conventional restorative treatment (CRT) using composite resin showing superior results; five studies presented data regarding the depth of caries lesions, and CRT with compomer resulted in the best results. Seven studies considered occlusoproximal surfaces, and the Hall technique showed the best SR among the evaluated treatments. Finally, two annual applications of silver diamine fluoride showed the best nonrestorative approach to arrest caries lesions on occlusal and smooth surfaces.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS

The treatments for dentin caries lesions in primary teeth depend on the depth of progression and the surface involved. However, few of the included studies provided evidence to strongly recommend the best treatment option.

OTHER

Funding: FAPESP; Systematic review registration number-PROSPERO CRD42016037784.

Survival percentages of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations and sealants in posterior teeth: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study is to update the results of two previous meta-analyses, published in 2006 and 2012, on the survival percentages of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations and ART sealants. The current meta-analysis includes Chinese publications not investigated before.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Until February 2017, six databases were interrogated (two English, one Portuguese, one Spanish and two Chinese). Using six exclusion criteria, a group of six independent reviewers selected 43 publications from a total of 1958 potentially relevant studies retrieved. Confidence intervals and/or standard errors were calculated and the heterogeneity variance of the survival rates was estimated.

RESULTS

The survival percentages and standard errors of single-surface and multiple-surface ART restorations in primary posterior teeth over the first 2 years were 94.3% (± 1.5) and 65.4% (± 3.9), respectively; for single-surface ART restorations in permanent posterior teeth over the first 3 years, they were 87.1% (± 3.2); and for multiple-surface ART restorations in permanent posterior teeth over the first 5 years, they were 77% (± 9.0). The mean annual dentine-carious-lesion-failure percentages in previously sealed pits and fissures using ART sealants in permanent posterior teeth over the first 3 and 5 years were 0.9 and 1.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

ART single-surface restorations presented high survival percentages in both primary and permanent posterior teeth, whilst ART multiple-surface restorations presented lower survival percentages. ART sealants presented a high-caries-preventive effect.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

ART is an effective evidence-based option for treating and preventing carious lesions in primary and permanent posterior teeth.

Randomized clinical trial of encapsulated and hand-mixed glass-ionomer ART restorations: one-year follow-up

Objective

This prospective, randomized, split-mouth clinical trial evaluated the clinical performance of conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC; Riva Self-Cure, SDI), supplied in capsules or in powder/liquid kits and placed in Class I cavities in permanent molars by the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) approach.

Material and Methods

A total of 80 restorations were randomly placed in 40 patients aged 11-15 years. Each patient received one restoration with each type of GIC. The restorations were evaluated after periods of 15 days (baseline), 6 months, and 1 year, according to ART criteria. Wilcoxon matched pairs, multivariate logistic regression, and Gehan-Wilcoxon tests were used for statistical analysis.

Results

Patients were evaluated after 15 days (n=40), 6 months (n=34), and 1 year (n=29). Encapsulated GICs showed significantly superior clinical performance compared with hand-mixed GICs at baseline (p=0.017), 6 months (p=0.001), and 1 year (p=0.026). For hand-mixed GIC, a statistically significant difference was only observed over the period of baseline to 1 year (p=0.001). Encapsulated GIC presented statistically significant differences for the following periods: 6 months to 1 year (p=0.028) and baseline to 1 year (p=0.002). Encapsulated GIC presented superior cumulative survival rate than hand-mixed GIC over one year. Importantly, both GICs exhibited decreased survival over time.

Conclusions

Encapsulated GIC promoted better ART performance, with an annual failure rate of 24%; in contrast, hand-mixed GIC demonstrated a failure rate of 42%.

Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries

BACKGROUND

Dental caries is a sugar-dependent disease that damages tooth structure and, due to loss of mineral components, may eventually lead to cavitation. Dental caries is the most prevalent disease worldwide and is considered the most important burden of oral health. Conventional treatment methods (drill and fill) involve the use of rotary burs under local anaesthesia. The need for an electricity supply, expensive handpieces and highly trained dental health personnel may limit access to dental treatment, especially in underdeveloped regions.To overcome the limitations of conventional restorative treatment, the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) was developed, mainly for treating caries in children living in under-served areas of the world where resources and facilities such as electricity and trained manpower are limited. ART is a minimally invasive approach which involves removal of decayed tissue using hand instruments alone, usually without use of anaesthesia and electrically driven equipment, and restoration of the dental cavity with an adhesive material (glass ionomer cement (GIC), composite resins, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RM-GICs) and compomers).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) compared with conventional treatment for managing dental caries lesions in the primary and permanent teeth of children and adults.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 22 February 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 1), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 22 February 2017), Embase Ovid (1980 to 22 February 2017), LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database; 1982 to 22 February 2017) and BBO BIREME Virtual Health Library (Bibliografia Brasileira de Odontologia; 1986 to 22 February 2017). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least six months' follow-up that compared the effects of ART with a conventional restorative approach using the same or different restorative dental materials to treat caries lesions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data from included studies and assessed the risk of bias in those studies. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane to evaluate risk of bias and synthesise data. Where pooling was appropriate we conducted meta-analyses using the random-effects model. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 15 eligible studies randomising 3760 participants in this review. The age of participants across the studies ranged from 3 to 101 years, with a mean of 25.42 years. 48% of participants were male. All included studies were published between 2002 and 2016. Two of the 15 studies declared that the financial support was from companies that manufacture restorative material. Five studies were individually randomised parallel-group studies; six were cluster-randomised parallel-group studies; and four were randomised studies that used a split-mouth design. Eleven studies evaluated the effects of ART on primary teeth only, and four on permanent teeth. The follow-up period of the included studies ranged from 6 months to 36 months. We judged all studies to be at high risk of bias.For the main comparison of ART compared to conventional treatment using the same material: all but two studies used high-viscosity glass ionomer (H-GIC) as the restorative material; one study used a composite material; and one study used resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC)).Compared to conventional treatment using H-GIC, ART may increase the risk of restoration failure in the primary dentition, over a follow-up period from 12 to 24 months (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.27, five studies; 643 participants analysed; low-quality evidence). Our confidence in this effect estimate is limited due to serious concerns over risk of performance and attrition bias. For this comparison, ART may reduce pain during procedure compared with conventional treatment (MD -0.65, 95% CI -1.38 to 0.07; 40 participants analysed; low-quality evidence)Comparisons of ART to conventional treatment using composite or RM-GIC were downgraded to very low quality due to indirectness, imprecision and high risk of performance and attrition bias. Given the very low quality of the evidence from single studies, we are uncertain about the restoration failure of ART compared with conventional treatment using composite over a 24-month follow-up period (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.29; one study; 57 participants) and ART using RM-GIC in the permanent teeth of older adults with root caries lesions over a six-month follow-up period (OR 2.71, 95% CI 0.94 to 7.81; one study; 64 participants).No studies reported on adverse events or costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-quality evidence suggests that ART using H-GIC may have a higher risk of restoration failure than conventional treatment for caries lesions in primary teeth. The effects of ART using composite and RM-GIC are uncertain due to the very low quality of the evidence and we cannot rely on the findings. Most studies evaluated the effects of ART on the primary dentition.Well-designed RCTs are required that report on restoration failure at clinically meaningful time points, as well as participant-reported outcomes such as pain and discomfort. Due to the potential confounding effects from the use of different dental materials, a robust body of evidence on the effects of ART compared with conventional treatment using the same restoration material is necessary. We identified four ongoing trials that could provide further insights into this area.

In vitro and in vivo evaluations of glass-ionomer cement containing chlorhexidine for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment

Objectives:

Addition of chlorhexidine has enhanced the antimicrobial effect of glass ionomer cement (GIC) indicated to Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART); however, the impact of this mixture on the properties of these materials and on the longevity of restorations must be investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of incorporating chlorhexidine (CHX) in the in vitro biological and chemical-mechanical properties of GIC and in vivo clinical/ microbiological follow-up of the ART with GIC containing or not CHX.

Material and Methods:

For in vitro studies, groups were divided into GIC, GIC with 1.25% CHX, and GIC with 2.5% CHX. Antimicrobial activity of GIC was analyzed using agar diffusion and anti-biofilm assays. Cytotoxic effects, compressive tensile strength, microhardness and fluoride (F) release were also evaluated. A randomized controlled trial was conducted on 36 children that received ART either with GIC or GIC with CHX. Saliva and biofilm were collected for mutans streptococci (MS) counts and the survival rate of restorations was checked after 7 days, 3 months and one year after ART. ANOVA/Tukey or Kruskal-Wallis/ Mann-Whitney tests were performed for in vitro tests and in vivo microbiological analysis. The Kaplan-Meier method and Log rank tests were applied to estimate survival percentages of restorations (p<0.05).

Results:

Incorporation of 1.25% and 2.5% CHX improved the antimicrobial/anti-biofilm activity of GIC, without affecting F release and mechanical characteristics, but 2.5% CHX was cytotoxic. Survival rate of restorations using GIC with 1.25% CHX was similar to GIC. A significant reduction of MS levels was observed for KM+CHX group in children saliva and biofilm 7 days after treatment.

Conclusions:

The incorporation of 1.25% CHX increased the in vitro antimicrobial activity, without changing chemical-mechanical properties of GIC and odontoblast-like cell viability. This combination improved the in vivo short-term microbiological effect without affecting clinical performance of ART restorations.

Atraumatic Restorative Treatment compared to the Hall Technique for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

In many parts of the world, school-age children have high dental treatment needs; however, there is often low, or no, dental care provision. Although Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) was developed to address this, its survival rate in occluso-proximal lesions is low. An alternative, the Hall Technique (HT) has shown better relative outcomes for occluso-proximal lesions, but has not been directly compared to ART or tested in field settings. This trial will compare ART and the HT for the most clinically- and cost-effective strategy for managing occluso-proximal lesions in primary molars, in a school setting, using low-technology and child-friendly dental techniques.

Methods/Design

This two-arm, parallel group, patient-randomized controlled, superiority trial will have treatment provided in schools. Schoolchildren (n = 124, age 6–8) with at least one occluso-proximal carious primary molar lesion will have random allocation to treatment with ART or HT. Baseline measures and outcome data will be assessed through participant report, clinical examination and parent report/questionnaires. The primary outcome is survival rate, a composite measure of absence of Minor Failures (a defect in the restoration/crown, but not interfering with tooth health) and Major Failures (signs or symptoms of irreversible pulp damage, such as dental fistula/abscess, tooth fracture or failures that cannot be repaired). Secondary outcomes are: (1) child-reported discomfort, (2) childrens’ and (3) parents’ concerns around dental appearance and (4) acceptability of treatments, (5) occlusal-vertical dimensions (OVD) changes, (6) plaque index, (7) gingival health, (8) decayed, missing, filled teeth in permanent teeth (DMFT)/decayed, missing, filled teeth in primary teeth (dmft), (9) oral health-related-quality of life, reported by children and parents/caregivers, (10) the incremental cost-effectiveness, and (11) operator effect. A trained and calibrated examiner will evaluate the treated teeth after 1 week, then 1, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post treatment. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression tests will be used to investigate the primary outcome. The Mann-Whitney or t test, Friedman test, paired t test or Wilcoxon test and Ordinal Logistic Regression Analysis will be used to analyze the secondary outcomes.

Discussion

The results of this trial will support decision-making by clinicians and policy-makers for managing occluso-proximal lesions in settings with constrained resources and limited dental access.

Trial registration

www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02569047, registered 5 October 2015.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1270-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

One-year follow-up of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment(ART) for dental caries in children undergoing oncohematological treatment: a pragmatic trial

Background

The oral condition in children undergoing oncohematological treatment can have a negative impact on the course of disease. Little is known about survival of tooth restorations in these patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the longevity of restorations and sealants performed by Atraumatic Restoration Treatment (ART) in patients undergoing oncohematological treatment.

Methods

ART single surface restorations and sealants were performed in the experimental group (E), which comprised children (2–13 years old) undergoing oncohematological treatment, and in the control group (C), in which patients did not undergo such treatment. The same examiner evaluated the ART at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after preparation, using the same criteria for restorations and sealants. ART was successful if the sealant or restoration did not need a repair in the follow-up assessment. Descriptive, bivariate and Cox’s proportional hazard analyses were performed at a significance level of 5 %.

Results

The two groups, one including 24 children (E) and the other 14 children (C), received 101 and 52 ART procedures, respectively. The success rates were 95.0 % (E) and 100 % (C) at 1 month (P = 0.233); 81.2 % (E) and 92.3 % (C) at 3 months (P = 0.009); 72.2 % (E) and 80.8 % (C) at 6 months (P = 0.050) and 48.5 % (E) and 73.1 % (C) at 12 months (P = 0.001). The final Cox’s regression model for occurrence of ART failure needing repair did not show differences between groups (E: OR = 1.6, 95 % CI 0.8–2.9); primary teeth had a shorter survival than permanent teeth (OR = 2.1, 95 % CI 1.2–3.7).

Conclusions

Oncohematological treatment did not interfere with the longevity of ART restorations and sealants, which suggests the potential use of this technique in children undergoing chemotherapy.

Trial registration

Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (REBEC) RBR-2c3c52. Registered 5 June 2014. http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-2c3c52/

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12903-015-0110-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Randomized controlled clinical trial of the 24-months survival of composite resin restorations after one-step incomplete and complete excavation on primary teeth

OBJECTIVE

This randomized clinical trial aimed to compare the 24-months survival of composite restorations in primary molars after partial caries removal (PCR) and total caries removal (TCR).

METHODS

Forty-eight children aged 3-8 years with at least one molar with a deep carious lesion were included (PCR; n=66; TCR; n=54). For PCR, excavation was stopped when dentine with a leathery consistency was achieved; in the TCR group, total absence of carious tissue was confirmed using a blunt-tipped probe. Pulpotomy was performed in cases of pulp exposure. Success was assessed by modified USPHS criteria with Alpha and Bravo scores recorded as success.

RESULTS

Pulp exposure occurred in 1 and 15 of the teeth treated with PCR and TCR respectively (p<0.01). The restorations survival rate after 24 months was 66% (PCR) and 86% (TCR) (p=0.03). When teeth that received pulpotomy were analyzed separately, the survival rate was 92% (p=0.09). PCR performed in occlusoproximal restorations demonstrated the lowest success rate (p=0.002). PCR increases 2.90 times the probability of having a restorative failure compared to TCR (p=0.03), after adjusting for cavity type. When pulp exposure and restoration failure were considered as the outcome, there was no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.10) with success rates of 64% (PCR) and 61% (TCR).

CONCLUSION

Collectively, deciduous teeth submitted to PCR prevented pulp exposure and, consequently, more invasive treatments; otherwise, PCR yielded lower longevity for composite restoration compared to TCR, suggesting that PCR restorations need to be followed over time, especially when multi-surface restorations are involved.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Composite restorations on carious remaining tissue require monitoring over time, especially those performed in more than one surface. Even if the restorations present shortcomings over the time, the majority of them are subject to repair, allowing more conservative approaches for teeth with deep caries lesions.

Do Laboratory Results Concerning High-Viscosity Glass-Ionomers versus Amalgam for Tooth Restorations Indicate Similar Effect Direction and Magnitude than that of Controlled Clinical Trials? - A Meta-Epidemiological Study

Background

A large percentage of evidence concerning dental interventions is based on laboratory research. The apparent wealth of laboratory evidence is sometimes used as basis for clinical inference and recommendations for daily dental practice. In this study two null-hypotheses are tested: whether trial results from laboratory and controlled clinical trials concerning the comparison of high-viscosity glass-ionomer cements (HVGIC) to amalgam for restorations placed in permanent posterior teeth have: (i) similar effect direction and (ii) similar effect magnitude.

Methods

7 electronic databases were searched, as well as reference lists. Odds ratios (OR) and Standardised Mean Differences (SMD) with 95% Confidence intervals were computed for extracted dichotomous and continuous data, respectively. Pooled effect estimates for laboratory and clinical data were computed to test for effect direction. Odds ratios were converted into SMDs. SMDs from laboratory and clinical data were statistically compared to test for differences in effect magnitude. The analysed results were further investigated within the context of potential influencing or confounding factors using a Directed acyclic graph.

Results

Of the accepted eight laboratory and nine clinical trials, 13 and 21 datasets could be extracted, respectively. The pooled results of the laboratory datasets were highly statistically significant in favor of amalgam. No statistically significant differences, between HVGICs and amalgam, were identified for clinical data. For effect magnitude, statistically significant differences between clinical and laboratory trial results were found. Both null-hypotheses were rejected.

Conclusion

Laboratory results concerning high-viscosity glass-ionomers versus amalgam for tooth restorations do not indicate similar effect direction and magnitude than that of controlled clinical trials.

Use of glass ionomer cement containing antibiotics to seal off infected dentin: a randomized clinical trial

Dental materials with antibacterial properties can prevent the harmful effects caused by oral cariogenic bacteria. This double-blind controlled clinical trial evaluated the performance of a glass ionomer cement (GIC) added with antibiotics for sealing infected dentin in atraumatic restorations of primary molars. The study enrolled 45 children (45 teeth) between 5 and 8 years of age, of both genders, divided into two groups: GC (n=22), where cavities were lined with a conventional GIC (Vidrion F) and GA (n=23), with cavities lined with Vidrion F added with 1% each of metronidazole, ciprofloxacin and cefaclor antibiotic. Both groups were restored with Ketac Molar Easymix. Molars with carious lesions on the inner half of dentin without clinical or radiographic pulp damage were selected. Patients were evaluated clinically (pain, fistulas or mobility) and radiographically (area of caries, periapical region and furcation) after 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. For statistical analysis, chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests were used with a 5% significance level. GA (82.6-95.7%) had better results than GC (12.5-36.4%) in all evaluations (p<0.05) and the difference in the success rate was 46.2-72.5% higher for GA. The use of the antibiotic-containing GIC liner on infected dentin proved satisfactory when applied in deciduous teeth.

The effect of GIC-brand on the survival rate of proximal-ART restorations

BACKGROUND

Laboratory studies show diverse behaviour of different brands of glass-ionomer cements (GIC).

AIM

This study investigated the clinical performance [survival rate (SR)] of three GIC brands applied to proximal atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations. Additionally, the SR of the tooth was evaluated.

DESIGN

Proximal cavities of 262 primary molars were restored. The patients had been randomly allocated to two operators and three GIC brands: Fuji IX, Hi-Dense, and Maxxion R. Restorations were evaluated after 1, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months. Failed restorations were, if possible, repaired or replaced. Linear regression analyses were used to evaluate the effect of GIC brand, operator, and surface of restoration. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and log-rank test were performed for both restoration survival and tooth survival (α = 5%).

RESULTS

After 3 years, 82.4% of the restorations were evaluated. The SR of the restorations was 24.4%, and there was no difference among GIC brands (log-rank test, P = 0.6). In the first 18 months, a significant operator effect and significantly higher failures in distal surfaces were found. The SR of the tooth was 81.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

The SR of proximal ART restorations was relatively low when compared with the SR of the tooth. There are no differences in the performance among the GIC brands used in the study.

A preliminary clinical trial using flowable glass-ionomer cement as a liner in proximal-ART restorations: the operator effect

Objectives: This in vivo study was carried out to assess the influence of the operator experience on the survival rate of proximal-ART restorations using a two-layer technique to insert the glass-ionomer cement (GIC). Study Design: Forty five proximal cavities in primary molars were restored in a school setting according to the ART technique. The cavities were restored by two operators with Ketac Molar Easymix, and received a flowable layer of GIC prior to a second GIC layer with a regular consistency. The operators had different clinical experiences with ART (no experience or two years of experience), but both completed a one-week training to perform the restorations and the GIC mixing in this study. Results: After a 12-month follow-up, 74% of the restorations survived; the main reason for failure was bulk fracture or total loss of the restoration.There was no operator influence (log-rank test p=0.2) Conclusion: The results encourage future well designed controlled clinical trials using the two-layer technique for insertion of GIC in proximal-ART restorations, after training the operators.

Key words:Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART), Glass-ionomer, proximal restorations.

Alternative treatment strategies for carious primary teeth: An overview of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Dental decay in children's primary teeth is a major health problem in the Great Britain with, in some areas, nearly 60% of five-year-olds having some experience of caries and 16% already having had at least one tooth extracted. Whilst currently accepted best practice for the management of carious primary teeth involves complete caries removal and placement of a plastic restoration, such conventional treatment is unpopular with general dental practitioners. Indeed, less than 15% of carious cavities in five-year-olds are currently restored and as such, there has been recent interest in alternative 'minimal intervention' treatment techniques for managing dental caries.

REVIEW

This review summarises the literature and also recent research efforts directed towards understanding the role of alternative treatment regimens including: (1) alternative techniques for cavity preparation and excavation and (2) the isolation of the carious process (in some cases, using cariostatic materials) from the oral environment or sealing in dental caries.

Restoration of class II cavities in primary molar teeth with conventional and resin modified glass ionomer cements: a systematic review of the literature

AIM

To review the literature concerning the restoration of primary teeth with glass ionomer (GIC) or resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGI) used in conventional class II cavities.

METHODS

A search of the literature identified through Medline between 1966 and 2006 using the key words: glass ionomer, resin modified, glass polyalkenoate, deciduous/primary teeth. Studies that used ART or tunnel preparations were excluded. Papers of relevant clinical studies (prospective and retrospective) were assessed and graded using predetermined criteria. Papers were graded according to the number of criteria met as (A >90%, B1 = 75%, B2 = 50%, C <50%).

RESULTS

The search identified 411 papers, from which an application of the inclusion criteria yielded 20 studies. Of these, 2 were rated B1 and 18 B2. Failure rates varied from 6.6% to 60% for GIC, and from 2% to 24% for RMGI.

CONCLUSION

GIC cannot be recommended for class II cavities in primary molars. There is evidence that RMGIC can perform successfully in small to moderate sized class II restorations.

Effects of oral hygiene, residual caries and cervical Marginal-gaps on the survival of proximal atraumatic restorative treatment approach restorations

Background:

Although Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach has been in existence for a while, the reasons for the poor performance of multisurface ART restorations are not very clear.

Aim:

The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of oral hygiene, residual caries and cervical marginal-gaps on survival of proximal ART restorations.

Settings:

Two rural divisions in Kenya were selected for the study.

Design:

A randomized clinical trial.

Material and Methods:

The 804 children in the study had their baseline- and 2-year dental plaque levels documented. Each child received one proximal restoration in a primary molar using ART approach, together with trained and pre-tested operators/assistants, three glass ionomer cements (GIC)-brands and two tooth-isolation methods. The restorations were clinically evaluated soon after placement and after 2 years. Post-restorative bite-wing radiographs taken soon after restoration were also evaluated.

Statistical analysis:

Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 14 computer programme was used and results tested using Pearson's correlation, Cox Proportional Hazards regression analysis and Multiple Logistic regression models tests.

Results:

At baseline and after 2 years, the mean cumulative survival and plaque index changed from 94.4% to 30.8% and 2.34 (Standard Deviation, or SD of 0.46) to 1.92 (SD 2.1) respectively, with higher plaque indices associated with higher restoration failures. Of the 507 radiographs evaluated, 48 (9.5%), 63 (12.4%) and 9 (1.8%) restorations had residual caries (RC), cervical marginal-gaps (CMG) and both RC/CMG respectively. Survival of the restorations with RC/CMG was significantly lower (p = 0.003) compared to those with RC or without RC.

Conclusion:

Low survival of proximal restorations in the study was associated with the presence of cervical marginal-gaps.

Randomized clinical trial on effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride and glass ionomer in arresting dentine caries in preschool children

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of annual topical application of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) solution, semi-annual topical application of SDF solution, and annual application of a flowable high fluoride-releasing glass ionomer in arresting active dentine caries in primary teeth.

METHODS

A total of 212 children, aged 3-4 years, were randomly allocated to one of three groups for treatment of carious dentine cavities in their primary teeth: Gp1-annual application of SDF, Gp2-semi-annual application of SDF, and Gp3-annual application of glass ionomer. Follow-up examinations were carried out every six months to assess whether the treated caries lesions had become arrested.

RESULTS

After 24 months, 181 (85%) children remained in the study. The caries arrest rates were 79%, 91% and 82% for Gp1, Gp2 and Gp3, respectively (p=0.007). In the logistic regression model using GEE to adjust for clustering effect, higher caries arrest rates were found in lesions treated in Gp2 (OR=2.98, p=0.007), those in anterior teeth (OR=5.55, p<0.001), and those in buccal/lingual smooth surfaces (OR=15.6, p=0.004).

CONCLUSION

Annual application of either SDF solution or high fluoride-releasing glass ionomer can arrest active dentine caries. Increasing the frequency of application to every 6 months can increase the caries arrest rate of SDF application.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Arrest of active dentine caries in primary teeth by topical application of SDF solution can be enhanced by increasing the frequency of application from annually to every 6 months, whereas annual paint-on of a flowable glass ionomer can also arrest active dentine caries and may provide a more aesthetic outcome.

Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis

The purpose of this study is to perform a systematic investigation plus meta-analysis into survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations using high-viscosity glass ionomers and to compare the results with those from the 2005 ART meta-analysis. Until February 2010, four databases were searched. Two hundred four publications were found, and 66 reported on ART restorations or sealant survival. Based on five exclusion criteria, two independent reviewers selected the 29 publications that accounted for the meta-analysis. Confidence intervals (CI) and or standard errors were calculated and the heterogeneity variance of the survival rates was estimated. Location (school/clinic) was an independent variable. The survival rates of single-surface and multiple-surface ART restorations in primary teeth over the first 2 years were 93% (CI, 91-94%) and 62% (CI, 51-73%), respectively; for single-surface ART restorations in permanent teeth over the first 3 and 5 years it was 85% (CI, 77-91%) and 80% (CI, 76-83%), respectively and for multiple-surface ART restorations in permanent teeth over 1 year it was 86% (CI, 59-98%). The mean annual dentine lesion incidence rate, in pits and fissures previously sealed using ART, over the first 3 years was 1%. No location effect and no differences between the 2005 and 2010 survival rates of ART restorations and sealants were observed. The short-term survival rates of single-surface ART restorations in primary and permanent teeth, and the caries-preventive effect of ART sealants were high.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

ART can safely be used in single-surface cavities in both primary and permanent teeth. ART sealants have a high caries preventive effect.

Absence of carious lesions at margins of glass-ionomer cement and amalgam restorations: An update of systematic review evidence

Background

This article aims to update the existing systematic review evidence elicited by Mickenautsch et al. up to 18 January 2008 (published in the European Journal of Paediatric Dentistry in 2009) and addressing the review question of whether, in the same dentition and same cavity class, glass-ionomer cement (GIC) restored cavities show less recurrent carious lesions on cavity margins than cavities restored with amalgam.

Methods

The systematic literature search was extended beyond the original search date and a further hand-search and reference check was done. The quality of accepted trials was assessed, using updated quality criteria, and the risk of bias was investigated in more depth than previously reported. In addition, the focus of quantitative synthesis was shifted to single datasets extracted from the accepted trials.

Results

The database search (up to 10 August 2010) identified 1 new trial, in addition to the 9 included in the original systematic review, and 11 further trials were included after a hand-search and reference check. Of these 21 trials, 11 were excluded and 10 were accepted for data extraction and quality assessment. Thirteen dichotomous datasets of primary outcomes and 4 datasets with secondary outcomes were extracted. Meta-analysis and cumulative meta-analysis were used in combining clinically homogenous datasets. The overall results of the computed datasets suggest that GIC has a higher caries-preventive effect than amalgam for restorations in permanent teeth. No difference was found for restorations in the primary dentition.

Conclusion

This outcome is in agreement with the conclusions of the original systematic review. Although the findings of the trials identified in this update may be considered to be less affected by attrition- and publication bias, their risk of selection- and detection/performance bias is high. Thus, verification of the currently available results requires further high-quality randomised control trials.

Carious primary teeth in children: can or should they be left unrestored?

There is no doubt that the overall caries prevalence in the UK is amongst one of the lowest in Europe. However the generalised ‘average’ picture from a public dental health point of view can be misleading and not a representation of what the clinicians face day-to-day in NHS practice. It has become increasingly clear that children from deprived backgrounds bear the highest burden of disease.

Short communication: Influence of different isolation methods on the survival of proximal ART restorations in primary molars after two years

AIM

This was to evaluate the influence of two methods of tooth-isolation on the survival rate of proximal ART restorations in the primary molars.

METHODS

The study was conducted in two rural divisions in Kenya, with 7 operators randomly paired to a group of 8 assistants. A total of 804 children each had one proximal cavity in a primary molar restored using the ART approach. During restorations 2 isolation methods, rubber dam or cotton wool rolls, and 3 brands of glass ionomer cements were used by the operators. The restorations were then followed for a period of 2 years.

STATISTICS

SPSS 14.0 was used to analyse and relate the data obtained to the method of isolation used.

RESULTS

After 2 years 30.8% of the ART restorations had survived. Higher survival rates of the restorations were obtained when using rubber dam irrespective of the GIC material or the operator.

CONCLUSION

Generally the survival rate of the proximal restorations in the present study was very low, but the use of rubber dam resulted in a higher survival rate of the restorations.

A clinical evaluation of two glass ionomer cements in primary molars using atraumatic restorative treatment technique in India: 1 year follow up

AIM

To compare the clinical performance of two glass ionomer cements, Amalgomer CR and Fuji IX in small and medium cavities prepared using Atraumatic restorative treatment approach in India.

STUDY DESIGN

One hundred school children in the age group of 4-9 years who had bilateral matched pair of carious lesions in primary posterior teeth were included. A split mouth design was used in which two materials were randomly placed in contralateral sides. The performance of the restorations was assessed after 1 year using Frenken's criteria (1996). Survival analysis of restoration was done using chi-square test.

RESULTS

The survival rate of Amalgomer CR and Fuji IX class I restorations were 97.4% and 94.9%, respectively. In class II cavities 95.1% and 88.5% of Amalgomer CR and Fuji IX restorations were successful. Amalgomer CR and Fuji IX showed a success of 94.2% and 92.3% in small sized class II cavities. Amalgomer CR showed a 100% success for medium sized class I and II restorations. Whereas Fuji IX showed a 100% and 66.7% success in medium sized class I and II cavities.

CONCLUSION

The clinical performances of both materials were satisfactory at the end of 1 year and ART is suitable procedure to be done in a dental clinic for children.

Two years survival rate of Class II ART restorations in primary molars using two ways to avoid saliva contamination

AIM

To compare the survival rates of Class II Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) restorations placed in primary molars using cotton rolls or rubber dam as isolation methods.

METHODS

A total of 232 children, 6-7 years old, both genders, were selected having one primary molar with proximal dentine lesion. The children were randomly assigned into two groups: control group with Class II ART restoration made using cotton rolls and experimental group using rubber dam. The restorations were evaluated by eight calibrated evaluators (Kappa > 0.8) after 6, 12, 18 and 24 months.

RESULTS

A total of 48 (20.7%) children were considered dropout, after 24 months. The cumulative survival rate after 6, 12, 18 and 24 months was 61.4%, 39.0%, 29.1% and 18.0%, respectively for the control group, and 64.1%, 55.1%, 40.1% and 32.1%, respectively for the rubber dam group. The log rank test for censored data showed no statistical significant difference between the groups (P = 0.07). The univariate Cox Regression showed no statistical significant difference after adjusting for independent variables (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both groups had similar survival rates, and after 2 years, the use of rubber dam does not increase the success of Class II ART restorations significantly.

Influence of the experience of operator and assistant on the survival rate of proximal ART restorations: two-year results

AIM

The objective of the study was to determine the influence of the experience of the operator and the assistant on the survival rate of proximal ART- restorations after 2 years when placed using two methods of tooth-isolation and three glass ionomer cement-brands.

STUDY DESIGN

A clinical intervention study.

METHODS

Each of 804 children aged 6-8 years received one proximal restoration in their primary molars. The restorations were placed by 'experienced/inexperienced' operators randomly paired with 'experienced/ inexperienced' assistants. The atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach was used with 3 brands of glass ionomer cements (GIC) and 2 tooth-isolation methods (rubber dam vs cotton rolls). Trained and calibrated evaluators evaluated the restorations, soon after placement and after 2 years.

STATISTICS

The data collected were analyzed using SPSS 14.0, to determine and relate the survival rate of the restorations to the operator and assistant with respect to the other factors such as the restorative material used and the isolation method applied.

RESULTS

After 2 years, the survival rate of the restorations was 30.8%. In general, there were no statistical significant differences in the survival rate of the restorations made by the 'experienced' vs 'inexperienced' operators, but individually, the operator with more experience was associated with a significantly higher survival rate of the restorations. The experienced assistants were associated with significantly higher survival rates of the restorations. The most 'experienced' operator paired with any 'experienced' assistant and using rubber dam tooth-isolation method, was associated with a significantly higher survival rate of the restorations.

CONCLUSION

The combination of the 'experienced' operator and assistant using rubber dam tooth-isolation method had the best chance of survival for proximal ART restorations, irrespective of the material-brand used.

Clinical Performance of Viscous Glass Ionomer Cement in Posterior Cavities over Two Years

In this controlled prospective clinical study the highly viscous glass ionomer cement Ketac Molar was clinically assessed in Class I and Class II cavities. Forty-nine subjects (mean age 32.3 years) received 108 restorations placed by six operators in conventional Black I and II type cavities with undercuts after excavating primary lesions or after removing insufficient restorations. At baseline, and after 6, 12, and 24 months, restorations were assessed by two independent investigators according to modified USPHS codes and criteria. Impressions of the restorations were taken and epoxy replicas were made. Between the baseline and the 24-month recall, 51 representative samples were analyzed at 130 × magnification by use of a stereo light microscope (SLM). Recall rates were 83% after 6 months, 50% after 12 months, and 24% after 24 months. Failure rates after 24 months were 8% for Class I and 40% for Class II fillings, mainly due to bulk fracture at occlusally loaded areas (Kaplan Meier survival analysis). Significant changes over time were found for the criteria “surface roughness”, “marginal integrity”, “restoration integrity”, and “overall judgement” (P < .05; Friedman test). SLM analysis revealed statistically significant differences for the following criteria over time (baseline/6 months/12 months (in % of entire evaluable margin length); P < .05; Friedman 2-way ANOVA): perfect margin 37/19/11, negative step formation 26/49/57, gap formation 2/7/9, and overhang 24/11/8. Replicas exhibited mainly negative step formation as main finding due to apparently inferior wear resistance (P < .05). Gap formations were more frequently observed in Class II restorations than in Class I (12% versus 3% after 12 months; P < .05, Mann-Whitney-U test). The evaluated margin lengths were not statistically different (P > .05, Friedman 2-way ANOVA).

Research proposal: evaluation of ART in adult patients

The primary objective of the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) is to reduce the indication of tooth extraction by means of a low-cost technique. Considering the difficulties of Brazilian public services to meet the demand of care of the low-income population, with lack of care to the adult population, which usually receives only emergency care, the aim of this study is to assess the performance of high-viscosity glass ionomer cements accomplished by the modified atraumatic restorative treatment in one- and multiple-surface cavities, compared to the conventional restorative approach. It will be analyzed the clinical performance of the materials; cost (material and human resources); patient satisfaction with the treatment received; and preventive effect of treatment.

Class I Gap-formation in Highly-viscous Glass-ionomer Restorations: Delayed vs Immediate Polishing

Delaying polishing for one day resulted in improved gap-formation for Class I restoration of highly-viscous conventional and conventional glass-ionomer cements

Influence of local anaesthesia on the quality of class II glass ionomer restorations

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the influence of local anaesthesia on the quality of class II glass ionomer restorations with discomfort as cofactor.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study population consisted of 6- to 7-year-old schoolchildren in Paramaribo and its environs. To be included, each child needed to have a proximally situated cavity in a primary molar that was accessible to hand instruments and where no pulp exposure was expected. They were randomly divided into four treatment groups: conventional method with and without local anaesthesia and atraumatic restorative treatment method (ART) with and without local anaesthesia. The restoration quality was scored using the evaluation criteria for ART restorations (successful if restoration is correct or has a minor defect and fails if defects are larger than 0.5 mm, if secondary caries is observed, if the restoration is fractured, partly or totally lost or if the pulp is involved) at 6 and 30 months after treatment. The extent of discomfort was registered by assessing the behaviour (modified Venham score) and observing the heart rate during treatment.

RESULTS

For this study 153 children were treated with hand instruments (ART) and 146 children with rotary instruments (conventional method). A total of 198 restorations were evaluated during follow-up periods. There were no significant differences in patient discomfort between the ART and the conventional group and between the anaesthesia and the non-anaesthesia group. The conventional restorations demonstrated significantly higher success rates than ART restorations after 6 (P = 0.001) and 30 months (P = 0.032). There were no significant differences in success rate between the anaesthesia and the non-anaesthesia group.

CONCLUSION

Local anaesthesia has no influence on discomfort during treatment. Furthermore, discomfort during treatment does not affect the success rate of restorations.

A clinical evaluation of resin-based composite and glass ionomer cement restorations placed in primary teeth using the ART approach: results at 24 months

BACKGROUND

The authors evaluated the 24-month performance of a packable resin-based composite/dentin bonding system and a high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (GIC) in restorations placed in primary molars with the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach.

METHODS

Three dentists placed 419 restorations in 219 children aged 6 through 10 years who had bilateral matched pairs of carious posterior Class I and II primary teeth. They used a split-mouth design to place the two materials, which were assigned randomly to contralateral sides. The authors evaluated the restorations according to U.S. Public Health Service Ryge criteria.

RESULTS

After 24 months, 96.7 percent of the Class I GIC restorations and 91 percent of the resin-based composite restorations survived, while the success rates for the Class II restorations were 76.1 percent and 82 percent for the GIC and resin-based composite restorations, respectively. The survival rate of the Class II resin-based composite restorations was 5.9 percent higher than that of the GIC restorations at the 24-month evaluation, but this difference was not statistically significant. However, the study results showed a statistically significant difference in survival rates between Class I and II restorations for both materials.

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The two-year clinical performance of both materials was satisfactory for the restoration of Class I and II primary molars using the ART approach.

The atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach for managing dental caries: a meta-analysis

The number of publications reporting on the survival of ART sealants and ART restorations has increased considerably in recent years. A systematic investigation of their longevity is therefore warranted. Based on three exclusion criteria, a literature search in the electronic libraries Pubmed and Medline revealed 28 eligible publications for inclusion in a meta-analysis. High mean survival rates for single-surface ART restorations using high-viscosity glass-ionomer in primary dentitions over 3 years were found (95% after 1 year to 86% after 3 years). These rates were statistically significantly higher than for those of multiple-surface ART restorations in primary dentitions (p<0.0001). High mean survival rates for single-surface ART restorations using high-viscosity glass-ionomer in permanent dentitions over 6 years were found (97% after 1 year to 72% after 6 years). The mean annual failure rates for single-surface ART restorations using high-viscosity glass-ionomer in primary and permanent dentitions and for multiple-surface ART restorations in primary dentitions are 4.7%, 4.7% and 17%, respectively. The number of studies reporting on the retention and caries preventive effect of ART sealants was low. It is concluded that single-surface ART restorations using high-viscosity glass-ionomer in both primary and permanent dentitions show high survival rates. Medium-viscosity glass-ionomer should not be used for ART restorations.

Radiation-induced root surface caries restored with glassionomer cement placed in conventional and ART cavity preparations: Results at two years

BACKGROUND

There are no published studies comparing the clinical performances of more-viscous glass-ionomer cement (GIC) restorations when placed using conventional and atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) cavity preparation methods to restore root surface caries.

METHODS

One dentist used encapsulated Fuji IX GP and Ketac-Molar to restore 72 conventional and 74 ART cavity preparations for 15 patients who had received cervicofacial radiation therapy. Two assessors evaluated the restorations at six, 12, and 24 months for retention, marginal defects and surface wear, and recurrent caries.

RESULTS

After two years, the cumulative restoration successes were 65.2 per cent for the conventional and 66.2 per cent for the ART cavity preparations, without statistical or clinical significance (P > 0.50). Restoration dislodgement accounted for 82.8 per cent and marginal defects for 17.2 per cent of all failures. There were no instances of unsatisfactory restoration wear or recurrent caries observed. Teeth with three or more restored cervical surfaces accounted for 79.3 per cent of all failures (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

For root surface caries restored with GIC, the use of hand instruments only with the ART method was an equally effective alternative to conventional rotary instrumentation for cavity preparation. Larger restorations had higher failures, usually from dislodgement.