Longevity of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement and a polyacid-modified resin composite restoring non-carious cervical lesions in a general dental practice

The document attached has been archived with permission from the Australian Dental Association. An external link to the publisher’s copy is included.Background: Long-term prospective survival studies of resin-modified glass ionomer cements (RMGICs) and polyacid-modified resin composites (compomers) placed in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) are lacking from general dental practice. Short-term studies have shown an unsatisfactory clinical performance for several materials. Methods: One practitioner placed 87 compomer (Compoglass, Vivadent-Ivoclar) and 73 encapsulated RMGIC (Fuji II LC, GC Int.) restorations in NCCLs for 61 adults. Compoglass was placed using SCA primer and Fuji II LC using GC Dentin Conditioner. No cavity preparation was undertaken. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for estimating the cumulative survivals for those restorations that were replaced, with the probability level set at a=0.05 for statistical significance. Results: Restorations were judged unsatisfactory (by the practitioner and the subjects) because of surface and marginal loss of material (68.8 per cent), dislodgement (18.8 per cent) and discoloration (12.4 per cent), these modes being similar for both materials (P=0.35). Unsatisfactory restorations were replaced in 121 (75.6 per cent) instances. After periods of up to five years, cumulative survival estimates were 14.9 (5.8 Standard Error) per cent for Compoglass and zero per cent for Fuji II LC (P=0.74). Median survivals were 30 months for Compoglass and 42 months for Fuji II LC. Conclusion: Both materials had high long-term unsatisfactory performances when placed in non-prepared NCCLs in a general dental practice.RJ Smales and KKW N