Abstract
Objective
Evaluate and compare the 5-year clinical performance of three high-viscosity glass ionomer restorative materials in small class II restorations.
Materials and Methods
Forty patients, each with four class II restorations, were enrolled in this trial. A total of 160 restorations were placed, 25% for each material, as follows: three high-viscosity conventional glass ionomer restorative systems (Ketac Universal Aplicap, EQUIA Forte and Riva Self Cure HV) and a microhybrid resin composite system (Filtek Z250). Clinical evaluation was performed at baseline and after 1, 3, and 5 years by two independent examiners using FDI criteria. Epoxy resin replicas were observed under scanning electron microscope (SEM) to examine surface characteristics. Data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis, Mann–Whitney U, Friedman, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests (p < 0.05).
Results
The success rates were 100% for resin composite, 97.4% for Ketac Universal, and 94.9% for both EQUIA Forte and Riva HV restorations. Statistically significant differences were observed between all groups in terms of surface luster and color match criteria (p < 0.05). Statistically significant changes were found over time for all criteria except for fracture of material, postoperative hypersensitivity, recurrence of caries, tooth integrity, periodontal response, adjacent mucosa, and oral health criteria (p > 0.05). SEM evaluations were in accordance with the clinical findings.
Conclusions
Although drawbacks in surface luster and color match appeared over the 5-year evaluation period, the three high-viscosity glass ionomer restorative materials provided successful clinical performance in small to medium sized class II cavities compared to microhybrid resin composite.
Clinical Significance
Glass ionomer restorations exhibited clinical performance similar to that of microhybrid resin composite restorations in small class II cavities subsequent to 5-year evaluation.
