Singh Shishir, Kulkarni Gaurav, Kumar R S Mohan, Jain Romi, Lokhande Ameya M, Sitlaney Teena K, Ansari Musharraf H F, Agarwal Navin S
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, TPCT's Terna Dental College, Maharashtra, India.
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Priyadarshini Dental College, Tamilnadu, India.
Restor Dent Endod. 2024 Nov 1;49(4):e41. doi: 10.5395/rde.2024.49.e41. eCollection 2024 Nov.
This review aimed to evaluate and compare the biological response (biocompatibility and cytotoxicity) of resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) in contrast to conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC) on human cells. Articles reporting parallel and split-mouth clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, prospective studies, and studies on human permanent teeth that assessed the biological response of GIC and RMGIC were included. The following electronic bibliographic databases were searched using the keywords: MEDLINE/PubMed, EBSCO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar. For the risk of bias MINORS tool and the modified scale of Animal Research: Reporting of Experiments and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials were used. Initial screening identified 552 studies, of which 9 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Different parameters such as odontoblastic changes, inflammatory response, tertiary dentin formation, presence of microorganisms, morphological changes, cell viability, number, and metabolism were used to evaluate the biological response of conventional GIC and RMGICs. Conventional GIC shows lower cytotoxicity compared to RMGIC in vital pulp therapy procedures. Further, studies and long-term clinical trials are needed to compare these observations for pulp therapy using the 2 test materials.
PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42023426021.
本综述旨在评估和比较树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀(RMGIC)与传统玻璃离子水门汀(GIC)对人体细胞的生物学反应(生物相容性和细胞毒性)。纳入报告平行和分口临床试验、随机对照试验、非随机对照试验、前瞻性研究以及评估GIC和RMGIC生物学反应的人类恒牙研究。使用关键词检索了以下电子文献数据库:MEDLINE/PubMed、EBSCO、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库和谷歌学术。对于偏倚风险,使用了MINORS工具以及动物研究报告实验的修改量表和报告试验的统一标准。初步筛选确定了552项研究,其中9篇文章符合纳入标准并被纳入研究。使用不同参数,如成牙本质细胞变化、炎症反应、第三期牙本质形成、微生物存在、形态变化、细胞活力、数量和代谢,来评估传统GIC和RMGIC的生物学反应。在活髓治疗程序中,传统GIC与RMGIC相比显示出较低的细胞毒性。此外,需要进一步的研究和长期临床试验来比较使用这两种测试材料进行牙髓治疗的观察结果。
PROSPERO标识符:CRD42023426021。