Glass Ionomer Coating with Nano-filled Resin versus Resin Reinforced Glass Ionomer as a Restorative Materials for Primary Molars

Mansour, Mohamed; Farag, Mohamed Shrief; Mahfouz, Shaymaa

doi:10.21608/dsu.2024.219258.1188

Glass Ionomer Coating with Nano-filled Resin versus Resin Reinforced Glass Ionomer as a Restorative Materials for Primary Molars

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ pediatric and preventive dentistry and dental public health faculty of dentistry - suez canal university

² Professor of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry and Dental Public Health Faculty of Dentistry - Suez Canal University

³ Associate professor of pediatric and preventive dentistry and dental public health faculty of dentistry - suez canal university

10.21608/dsu.2024.219258.1188

Abstract

Introduction: Glass Ionomer Coating (GICs) are a special group of dental
materials having some very unique properties. They adhere to slightly moist enamel
and dentin without the need for any adhesive system, they release fluoride and thus
have anticariogenic effects for an extended period, they can absorb and release fluoride
from topical fluoride solutions, they have thermal expansion similar to enamel, and
they are biocompatible with a low toxicity. Aim: the current study was to evaluate
and compare; the clinical performance of GIC with surface coat versus resin modified
GI restorations in primary molars in vivo. Materials and Methods: 24 children had
bilateral carious class I molars fulfilling the inclusion criteria were selected. 48 molars
were divided using split mouth technique into two groups; Equia-forte Group: 24
primary molar teeth with class I cavities were filled with glass ionomer (equia forte
fil) followed by coating with (Equia forte coat) in the right side to all patients. Riva Lc
Group: 24 primary molar teeth with class I cavities were filled with resin reinforced
glass ionomer (Riva light cure) in the left side to all patients. All restorations were
evaluated according to modified USPHS criteria at 1,3,6,9,12 months. Results: There
was no significant difference between Equia forte fil and Riva Lc. Conclusion: Both
Equia Forte and Riva LC restorations showed successful performance in class I cavities
in primary molars after 1 year according to modified USPHS criteria, Both Equia Forte
and Riva LC restorations could be used as variable options for restoring class I cavities
in primary molars.

Keywords

Main Subjects