Glass ionomer cement and composite resin - remineralizing effect
Midentistry review group
*Division of Public Oral Health, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
Abstract
Glass ionomer cements (GIC) have a higher remineralizing effect on enamel than composite resin (with or without fluoride content) in-vitro and in-situ.
This abstract is prepared and maintained by Midentistry, currently published in The MI Compendium, 3rd edition, Copyright © 2009 Midentistry. The full data of this review is available in http://www.midentistry.com/secure-folder/content/3/mic11E2.asp (ISBN: 0-620-34080-0)
This record should be cited as: Midentistry. Glass ionomer cement and composite resin - remineralizing effect. Minim Interv Comp Database Syst Rev 2009; 2: RV00920091104.
This version first published online: August 12, 2009
Last revised: November 4, 2009
Objectives
To assess whether GIC have a better remineralization effect than composite resin (with and without fluoride).
Search strategy
The trials were identified from a search of the PubMed database on: September 28, 2009 using the terms: "Tooth Remineralization"[Mesh] AND ("Glass Ionomer Cements"[Mesh] OR "Cermet Cements"[Mesh]) AND ("Composite Resins"[Mesh]) Reference check of included articles.
Inclusion criteria
All progressive 2-arm in-vitro, in-situ or in-vivo trials; with relevance to review question including computable data; published in English.
Data collection and analysis
The systematic literature search found 139 trials of which 8 were identified to be in line with the inclusion criteria. Of these, 5 trials (4 in-vitro, 1 in-situ)were accepted for data extraction. From the reviewed trials 12 individual datasets were extracted and analyzed.
Main results
The overall result of the in-vitro trials showed a higher remineralizing effect of GIC than composite resin. This was not confirmed, however, by the results of one dataset, which showed in-vitro no difference with either material under exposure of fluoride from tooth paste.
Authors' conclusions
The results show that GIC has a higher remineralizing effect than composite resin (with or without fluoride content) in absence of additional fluoride exposure from external sources. However, these finding need to be confirmed through further in-situ and in-vivo trials. It is recommended that such in-vivo trials should follow a randomized controlled study design and its reporting be based on the CONSORT statement.
