CLINICAL EVALUATION OF NEW BIOACTIVE RESTORATIVE MATERIAL VERSUS RESIN MODIFIED GLASS IONOMER IN RESTORATION OF CERVICAL CARIOUS LESIONS: RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL

El-Gaaly, Amira N.M; Hassan, Rasha Raafat; Shaalan, Omar Osama

doi:10.21608/adjc.2023.177122.1203

	CLINICAL EVALUATION OF NEW BIOACTIVE RESTORATIVE MATERIAL VERSUS RESIN MODIFIED GLASS IONOMER IN RESTORATION OF CERVICAL CARIOUS LESIONS: RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL
Advanced Dental Journal
Volume 6, Issue 2, April 2024, Page 339-349 PDF (367.56 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/adjc.2023.177122.1203
View on SCiNiTO
Authors
Amira N.M El-Gaaly ¹; Rasha Raafat Hassan ¹; Omar Osama Shaalan ¹^{, 2}
¹Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
²Conservative Dentistry Department, School of Dentistry, Newgiza University, Egypt
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the current study to evaluate the clinical performance of bioactive composite (ACTIVA Presto) versus resin modified glass ionomer (Fuji II) in restoration of cervical carious lesions. Material and methods: 34 participants received 34 cervical restorations randomly using either; ACTIVATM PrestoTM (Pulpdent Corp.) or Fuji II LC capsule (GC Corporation). After cavity preparation, restorative materials were applied according to manufacturers’ instructions. Restorations were evaluated using modified USPHS criteria by two blinded assessors at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Results: After 12 months there was no statistically significant difference between both materials for surface texture, marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, retention and gingival inflammation (P = 0.8616, P = 0.5050, P = 0.8618, P = 0.5050 and P = 0.6241) respectively. There was 30% more risk for slight gingival inflammation for ACTIVA presto when compared to Fuji II LC after 12 months (P = 0.6206). Regarding color match, there was no statistically significant difference at baseline and 6 months (P = 0.2786 and P = 0.2506) respectively, while at 12 months there was statistically significant difference (P = 0.0003). There was 4.6 times more risk for slight color mismatch for ACTIVA presto when compared to Fuji II LC after 12 months (P = 0.0045). Conclusion: Both ACTIVA Presto and Fuji II showed similar clinical performance in restoration of cervical carious lesions
Keywords
Bioactive restoration; ACTIVA Presto; Fuji II LC; Class V; USPHS criteria


Statistics Article View: 55 PDF Download: 34