TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of New Alkasite Based Restorative Material for Restoring Non- Carious Cervical Lesions- Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
AU - Ballal, N. V.
AU - Jalan, P.
AU - Rai, N.
AU - Al-Haj Husain, N.
AU - Özcan, M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright© 2023 Dennis Barber Ltd.
PY - 2023/2/28
Y1 - 2023/2/28
N2 - Two different restoration materials, an alkasite-based resin composite and a resinmodified glass ionomer cement were used to assess restoration of non-carious cervical dental lesions. This split mouth randomized controlled trial included 40 patients. After randomization both sides of the dental arch were restored with either an alkasite-based (Cention N, Ivoclar Vivadent) or a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Voco GmbH) restoration. The placed fillings were evaluated by blinded additional operators 1, 6 months and 1 year after to the USPHS criteria (retention, marginal integrity and discoloration, anatomical form and secondary caries). Data were analyzed using Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance test and Chi-square tests using SPSS software (SPSS Inc., Version 20) (P=0.05). As for retention and anatomic form both materials performed similar after one month. However, the retention and anatomic form for alkasite based restorative Cention showed significantly better results after 6 months (p=0.013/p=0.003) and one year (p=0.026/p=0.008). The resin modified glass ionomer restoration showed higher discoloration after 6 months (p=0.025) and one year (p=0.018), while Cention performed better regarding marginal integrity at all time intervals. No secondary caries occurred. Alkasite based restorative materials displayed superior technical, mechanical and aesthetical performance in a follow-up period of one year and can therefore be recommended as an alternative to resin-modified glass ionomer cements.
AB - Two different restoration materials, an alkasite-based resin composite and a resinmodified glass ionomer cement were used to assess restoration of non-carious cervical dental lesions. This split mouth randomized controlled trial included 40 patients. After randomization both sides of the dental arch were restored with either an alkasite-based (Cention N, Ivoclar Vivadent) or a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Voco GmbH) restoration. The placed fillings were evaluated by blinded additional operators 1, 6 months and 1 year after to the USPHS criteria (retention, marginal integrity and discoloration, anatomical form and secondary caries). Data were analyzed using Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance test and Chi-square tests using SPSS software (SPSS Inc., Version 20) (P=0.05). As for retention and anatomic form both materials performed similar after one month. However, the retention and anatomic form for alkasite based restorative Cention showed significantly better results after 6 months (p=0.013/p=0.003) and one year (p=0.026/p=0.008). The resin modified glass ionomer restoration showed higher discoloration after 6 months (p=0.025) and one year (p=0.018), while Cention performed better regarding marginal integrity at all time intervals. No secondary caries occurred. Alkasite based restorative materials displayed superior technical, mechanical and aesthetical performance in a follow-up period of one year and can therefore be recommended as an alternative to resin-modified glass ionomer cements.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85141678570&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85141678570&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1922/EJPRD_2410Ballal06
DO - 10.1922/EJPRD_2410Ballal06
M3 - Article
C2 - 35659319
AN - SCOPUS:85141678570
SN - 0965-7452
VL - 31
SP - 72
EP - 77
JO - The European journal of prosthodontics and restorative dentistry
JF - The European journal of prosthodontics and restorative dentistry
IS - 1
ER -