Bonding longevity of flowable GIC layer in artificially carious dentin

Purpose To evaluate the bond longevity of glass ionomer cement (GIC) to sound and artificially carious dentin, using a high viscosity material with regular consistency and using a flowable GIC, after one year water storage. Material and methods Sixty bovine incisors were polished to obtain flat buccal dentin. Thirty teeth were submitted to pH-cycling model to simulate artificial caries. Teeth from both dentin conditions (sound and caries) were randomly reassigned according to the powder/liquid ratio of the GIC (n=15): (1) regular (1:1) and (2) flowable GIC (1:2). Polyethylene tubes with internal diameter of 0.76 mm were placed over the pre-treated dentin and filled up with GIC (KetacTM Molar Easy Mix, 3M ESPE), immediately protected with a layer of petroleum jelly. Half of the specimens were evaluated by microshear bond strength test after 24 h, the other half was evaluated one year later, after water storage at 37 °C. Data (MPa) were analyzed with 3-way repeated measures ANOVA and Tukey׳s post-hoc tests (α=0.05). Results Statistical analysis revealed reduction of GIC bonding effectiveness after one year of water storage (5.4±1.4 to 3.4±1.3 MPa) (p<0.001). No significant differences were observed (p=0.126) between regular (4.2±1.8 MPa) and flowable (4.6±1.5 MPa) GIC consistency. Moreover, GIC showed better bonding effectiveness on sound (5.1±1.7 MPa) than artificially carious dentin (3.7±1.3 MPa) (p<0.001). Conclusions Both powder/liquid ratio of GIC show similar reduction of bonding effectiveness after one year, especially in artificially carious dentin substrate

ART is an alternative for restoring occlusoproximal cavities in primary teeth:evidence from an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: A previous systematic review showed that atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) can be an option to restore the occlusoproximal cavities in primary teeth; however, few studies fulfilled the criteria of inclusion to generate a high level of evidence. Aim: To update the existing systematic review and address questions regarding survival rate of ART restorations compared to the conventional approach in occlusoproximal cavities in primary molars. Design: The search was extended beyond the original search through the PubMed/MEDLINE database up to February 2016. Furthermore, Web of Science and EMBASE were searched. The inclusion criteria were subjects related to the scope of the systematic review. After selection by title and abstract, potentially eligible articles were read in full and included in accordance with exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was carried out with the outcome being the survival rate of restorations. Results: The search strategy identified 560 potentially relevant studies, in addition to 127 from the original systematic review. A total of four articles were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses. Meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between ART and conventional approaches in survival rate of occlusoproximal cavities (OR = 0.887, 95% CI: 0.574–1.371). Conclusion: ART restorations have similar survival rate compared to conventional treatment and can be considered an option to restore occlusoproximal cavities in primary molars