Usefulness of conventional glass ionomer cements in an environment of insufficient moisture exclusion

Mechanical Properties and Ion Release from Fibre-Reinforced Glass Ionomer Cement

The aim of this study was to compare the mechanical properties and ion release from a commercially available resin-modified glass ionomer cement to a formulation reinforced by the addition of short glass fibres at various percentages. Methods: Three experimental groups were prepared by adding a mass ratio of 10%, 15% and 20% of short glass fibres to the powder portion of the cement from a capsule (GC Fuji II LC), while the control group contained no fibres. Microhardness (n = 12), fracture toughness, and flexural, compressive and diametral tensile strength (n = 8) were evaluated. To study ion release, readings were obtained utilising fluoro-selective and calcium-selective electrodes after 24 h, 7 days and 30 days (n = 12). The spatial distribution of fibres within the material was evaluated through scanning electron microscopy. The data were analysed using one-way ANOVA with a Bonferroni adjustment. Results: The findings suggest that elevating fibre weight ratios to 20 wt% results in improved mechanical properties (p < 0.05) in microhardness, flexural strength, diametral tensile strength and fracture toughness. In terms of ion release, a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) was observed between the groups at the conclusion of 24 h and 7 days, when the fluoride release was much higher in the control group. However, after 30 days, no significant distinction among the groups was identified (p > 0.05). Regarding calcium release, no statistically significant differences were observed among the groups at any of the evaluated time points (p > 0.05). SEM showed the fibres were homogeneously incorporated into the cement in all experimental groups. Conclusions: Resin-modified glass ionomer enhanced with short glass fibres at a weight loading of 20% showcased the most favourable mechanical properties while concurrently maintaining the ability to release fluoride and calcium after a 30-day period.

Do bioactive materials show greater retention rates in restoring permanent teeth than non-bioactive materials? A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To answer the following research question: does the clinical evaluation of restorations on permanent teeth with bioactive materials show greater retention rates than those with non-bioactive materials?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search strategy was used in the following databases: MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, BBO, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and OpenGrey. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with a minimum of 2-year follow-up and evaluating at least one bioactive material in permanent teeth were included. Risk of bias was detected according to the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing the risk of bias (RoB 2.0), and network meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects Bayesian-mixed treatment comparison model.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies were included. The success of the restorations was assessed using modified USPHS system in 24 studies and the FDI criteria in 3 studies. Network meta-analysis revealed three networks based on restoration preparations. Resin composites were ranked with higher SUCRA values, indicating a greater likelihood of being the preferred treatment for class I, II, and III restorations. In class V, resin-modified glass ionomer cement was ranked with the highest value.

CONCLUSION

Bioactive restorative materials showed similar good clinical performance in terms of retention similarly to conventional resin composites.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The findings must be interpreted with caution because many RCT on restorative materials aim to verify the equivalence of new materials over the gold standard material rather than their superiority. The present systematic review also suggests that new RCT with longer follow-up periods are necessary.