Two-year clinical evaluation of three restorative materials in primary molars.

UNLABELLED

A variety of alternatives to amalgam are now available for use in Class I and Class II restorations in primary teeth, including glass ionomer cements, compomers and resin modified glass ionomer cements (RMGIC).

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the two-year clinical performance of three restorative dental materials: A resin modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji IILC), a compomer (Dyract AP) and a high viscosity glass ionomer cement (Fuji IX), in primary molars of pediatric patients with high caries risk activity and compared these results to those reported for amalgam restorations.

STUDY DESIGN

One hundred and forty nine Class I and Class II cavities in 45 patients aged 6 to 8 years were restored with compomer, glass ionomer cements and amalgam. Restorations were evaluated according to modified Ryge criteria by two examiners at baseline, and after 6, 12, 18 and 24 months of oral function. The data was submitted to statistical analysis (binomial and hyper geometric tests, p<0.05).

RESULTS

Two-year recall rate was 62.42%. Class I performed better than class II restorations. The difference in marginal discoloration between compomer and amalgam restorations was statistically significant (p=0.014). No other significant differences were found between GIC, compomer and amalgam restorations. The clinical performance of the three restorative materials compared to amalgam in Class I and Class II cavities at two-year recall was acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

The results, even in a population with high caries risk activity, suggest that these materials are suitable alternatives to amalgam in Class I and Class II restorations in primary teeth.