Clinical performance of an alkasite-based bioactive restorative in class II cavities: a randomized clinical trial

Abstract Objective This clinical study aimed to evaluate the clinical performance of an alkasite-based bioactive material by comparing it with a resin composite (RC) in the restoration of Class II cavities over a year. Methodology A hundred Class II cavities were restored at 31 participants. Groups were as follows: Cention N (CN) (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) and G-ænial Posterior (GP) (GC, Tokyo, Japan) in combination with G-Premio Bond (etch&rinse). Restorative systems were applied following manufacturers' instructions. They were finished and polished immediately after placement and scored based on retention, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, sensitivity, surface texture, and color match using modified USPHS criteria after 1 week (baseline), 6 months, and 12 months. Statistical analyses were performed using chi-square, McNemar's, and Kaplan Meier tests. Results After 12 months, the recall rate was 87%. Survival rates of CN and GP restorations were 92.5% and 97.7%, respectively. Three CN and one GP restorations lost retention. Seven CN (17.9%) and five (11.6%) GP restorations were scored as bravo for marginal adaptation and no significant difference was seen between groups (p=0.363). One (2.7%) CN and two GP (4.7%) restorations were scored as bravo for marginal discoloration, but no significant difference was observed between groups(p=1.00). For surface texture, three (8.1%) CN and three (7%) GP restorations were scored as bravo (p=1.00). None of the restorations demonstrated post-operative sensitivity or secondary caries at any examinations. Conclusion The tested restorative materials performed similar successful clinical performances after 12 months. ClinicalTrials.gov (NTC04825379).

One-year evaluation of a new restorative glass ionomer cement for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions in patients with systemic diseases: a randomized, clinical trial

Abstract Objective This randomized and clinical trial aimed to evaluate the performance of a new restorative Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC) for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) of patients with systemic diseases compared with a posterior resin composite after 12 months. Methodology 134 restorations were placed at 30 patients presenting systemic diseases by a single clinician. NCCLs were allocated to two groups according to restorative system used: a conventional restorative GIC [Fuji Bulk (GC, Tokyo Japan) (FB)] and a posterior resin composite [G-ænial Posterior (GC, Tokyo Japan) (GP)] used with a universal adhesive using etch&rinse mode. All restorative procedures were conducted according to manufacturer's instructions. Restorations were scored regarding retention, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, secondary caries, surface texture, and post-operative sensitivity using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria after 1 week (baseline), 6, and 12 months. Descriptive statistics were performed using chi-square tests. Cochran Q and Mc Nemar's tests were used to detect differences over time. Results After 12 months, recall rate was 93% and the rates of cumulative retention failure for FB and GP were 4.9% and 1.6% respectively. Both groups presented similar alpha rates for marginal adaptation (FB 86.2%, GP 95.5%) and marginal discoloration (FB 93.8%, GP 97%) at 6-month recall, but FB restorations showed higher bravo scores than GP restorations for marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration after 12 months (p<0.05). Regarding surface texture, 2 FB restorations (3.1%) were scored as bravo after 6 months. All restorations were scored as alpha for secondary caries and postoperative sensitivity after 12 months. Conclusion Although the posterior resin composite demonstrated clinically higher alpha scores than the conventional GIC for marginal adaptation and discoloration, both materials successfully restored NCCLs at patients with systematic disease after a year. Clinical relevance Due to its acceptable clinical results, the tested conventional restorative GIC can be used for the restoration of NCCLs of patients with systemic diseases.

Effects of in-office bleaching agent combined with different desensitizing agents on enamel

Abstract Objective: To analyze color change, microhardness and chemical composition of enamel bleached with in-office bleaching agent with different desensitizing application protocols. Materials and Methods: One hundred and seventeen polished anterior human enamel surfaces were obtained and randomly divided into nine groups (n = 13). After recording initial color, microhardness and chemical composition, the bleaching treatments were performed as G1: Signal Professional White Now POWDER&LIQUID FAST 38% Hydrogen peroxide(S); G2: S+Flor Opal/0.5% fluoride ion(F); G3: S+GC Tooth Mousse/Casein Phosphopeptide-Amorphous Calcium Phosphate (CPP-ACP) paste(TM); G4: S+UltraEZ/3% potassium nitrate&0.11% fluoride(U); G5: S+Signal Professional SENSITIVE PHASE 1/30% Nano-Hydroxyapatite (n-HAP) suspension(SP); G6: S-F mixture; G7: S-TM mixture; G8: S-U mixture; G9: S-SP mixture. Color, microhardness and chemical composition measurements were repeated after 1 and 14 days. The percentage of microhardness loss (PML) was calculated 1 and 14 days after bleaching. Data were analyzed with ANOVA, Welch ANOVA, Tukey and Dunnett T3 tests (p<0.05). Results: Color change was observed in all groups. The highest ΔE was observed at G7 after 1 day, and ΔE at G8 was the highest after 14 days (p<0.05). A decrease in microhardness was observed in all groups except G6 and G7 after 1 day. The microhardness of all groups increased after 14 days in comparison with 1 day after bleaching (p>0.05). PML was observed in all groups except G6 and G7 after bleaching and none of the groups showed PML after 14 days. No significant changes were observed after bleaching at Ca and P levels and Ca/P ratios at 1 or 14 days after bleaching (p>0.05). F mass increased only in G2 and G6, 1 day after bleaching (p<0.05). Conclusions: The use of desensitizing agents containing fluoride, CPP-ACP, potassium nitrate or n-HAP after in-office bleaching or mixed in bleaching agent did not inhibit the bleaching effect. However, they all recovered microhardness of enamel 14 days after in-office bleaching.