Hussainy Syed Nazia, Nasim Iffat, Thomas Toby, Ranjan Manish
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
J Conserv Dent. 2018 Sep-Oct;21(5):510-515. doi: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_51_18.
The restoration of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) often poses a challenge to the clinician. Various restorative materials are available in the market for the restoration of the same. Each material has various advantages and shortcomings.
The aim of this study was to compare and to evaluate the clinical performance of capsulated resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), flowable composite, and polyacid-modified composite resin (PMCR) in NCCLs.
A total of 101 restorations were placed among healthy controls in this clinical trial. A total of 101 restorations were divided into three groups with = minimum 32 per group (Group 1: 33 restorations, Group 2: 34 restorations, and Group 3: 34 restorations). The restorative materials used were capsulated RMGIC, flowable composite and PMCR. After the placement, the restorations were evaluated for the United States Public Health Services criteria for six parameters, namely retention, marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, color stability, surface roughness, and sensitivity. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6 and 12 months.
Statistics was performed using SPSS 21.0 version. Chi-square test was done to compare the proportions between groups. Fisher's exact test was used to compare proportion change between time points.
There was no statistically significant difference seen among the three groups for retention, color stability, surface roughness, and hypersensitivity. RMGIC had shown superior characteristics in marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration compared to flowable composite and PMCR, and the difference was statistically significant.
Within the limitations of this study, all the three restorative materials are clinically acceptable for the restoration of NCCLs. RMGIC is superior regarding marginal adaptation and esthetics for restoring NCCLs.
非龋性颈部病变（NCCLs）的修复常常给临床医生带来挑战。市场上有多种修复材料可用于此类修复。每种材料都有不同的优缺点。
本研究旨在比较和评估胶囊型树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀（RMGIC）、流动复合树脂和聚酸改性复合树脂（PMCR）用于NCCLs修复的临床性能。
在本临床试验中，共对101颗牙齿进行修复并纳入健康对照组。101颗修复牙齿分为三组，每组至少32颗（第1组：33颗修复牙齿，第2组：34颗修复牙齿，第3组：34颗修复牙齿）。使用的修复材料分别为胶囊型RMGIC、流动复合树脂和PMCR。修复后，根据美国公共卫生服务标准对修复体的六个参数进行评估，即固位、边缘适合性、边缘变色、颜色稳定性、表面粗糙度和敏感度。在基线、6个月和12个月时对修复体进行评估。
使用SPSS 21.0版本进行统计分析。采用卡方检验比较组间比例。采用Fisher精确检验比较不同时间点的比例变化。
三组在固位、颜色稳定性、表面粗糙度和过敏反应方面无统计学显著差异。与流动复合树脂和PMCR相比，RMGIC在边缘适合性和边缘变色方面表现出更优的特性，且差异具有统计学意义。
在本研究的局限性范围内，所有三种修复材料在临床上均可用于NCCLs的修复。RMGIC在修复NCCLs的边缘适合性和美观性方面更具优势。
