Longevity and Cariostatic effects of everyday Conventional Glass-ionomer and Amalgam Restorations in Primary Teeth: Three-year results

Author(s): V. Quist, L. Lauerberg, A. Poulsen and P.T. Teglers
Journal: Journal of Dental Research
Volume (number): Vol 76 - 7
Month, Year: July 1997
Major topic: Comparing the longevity of amalgam and glass ionomer restorations and the incidence of caries in the adjacent surface
Type of Article: Randomized clinical comparative study

Overview of method of research: Five hundred fifteen glass ionomer restorations and 543 amalgam restorations were prepared in 666 children on primary and permanent teeth and followed up for intactness and presence of decay on the adjacent tooth surface. The material of choice was alternated every week for 7 months. The materials were used for Class II (79%), Class III and Class V restorations. Adjacent surfaces were then monitored for development of decay, including white-spot lesions. No rubber dam was used
Findings: Six percent of patients dropped out after 3 years and 33% of the teeth exfoliated. Thirty seven percent of the restorations were disqualified due to replacement of the restoration, extraction fo the teeth and pulpal complications. All providers had a higher failure rate of GI restorations (39%) versus amalgam (17%); the difference was largely due to fractured restorations.
Key points/Summary : Conventional glass ionomers should not be used as an alternative to amalgam for Class II restorations in primary teeth, but can be used for Class I, III and V restorations.

Assessment of article: This article had a lot of confounding factors and is a little out-dated. Performing a simpler version of the study with modern materials and providers who are more comfortable with GI and now RMGI would be useful.

-Brian Schmid DMD