Heated Glass Ionomer Cement in Primary Molars

February 28, 2020 updated by: Marmara University

Randomized Clinical Trial of Heated High-Viscosity Glass Ionomer Class II Restorations in Primary Molars: 12 Months Follow Up

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the influence of heated in the clinical success of proximal high viscosity glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorations in primary molars.

Material & Method: This randomized, split mouth, multicenter study was performed in four different centers including 88 patients aged between 5-7 years old. Selection criteria included clinically and/or radiographically detected proximal caries extending into the dentin tissue. A total of 250 primary molars were restored with a bulk fill GIC (Equia Forte, GC, Europe) and randomly allocated to one of the following groups: 1) non-heated (n = 125) and 2) heated (n = 125). LED light (GC- D-Light DUO, Tokyo Japan) was used at standard mode 1200 mW/cm2, at 50-60 ºC, for 60 sec for heat application. All restorations were clinically evaluated using modified USPHS criteria at the baseline, 6 months and 12 months. Chi-square test, Fisher's Exact Chi-square test, Continuity (Yates) correction, Fisher Freeman Halton test and Mc Nemar test were used to compare qualitative data with descriptive statistical methods (frequency). Kaplan Meier and Life Tables were used for survival analysis. P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

88

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

5 years to 7 years (Child)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Subject is mentally and systemically healthy
  • Subject has at least two approximal carious lesions at both sides of jaws
  • Subject has a normal occlusal relationship with natural dentition
  • Subject has at least one adjacent tooth contact

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Subject has history of bruxism,
  • Subject has allergies to ingredients of glass ionomer based restorative materials.
  • Cavity/Caries has highly mineralized pigmented lesions, hypoplasia, fracture or cracks,
  • Subject has abrasion, erosion, abfraction,
  • Subject has fistula, abscess or pathological mobility,
  • Subject has pain, pulp exposure

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Non-Heated Arm
Proximal cavities were restored with Equia Forte (GC Corporation, Europe) according to manufacturer's orders.
Teeth were restored as same protocole with non-Heated Group. LED light (GC- D-Light DUO) was used at standard mode 1200 mW/cm2, at 50-60 ºC, for 60 sec.
Experimental: Heated Arm
Teeth were restored as same protocole with non-Heated Group. LED light (GC- D-Light DUO) was used at standard mode 1200 mW/cm2, at 50-60 ºC, for 60 sec.
Teeth were restored as same protocole with non-Heated Group. LED light (GC- D-Light DUO) was used at standard mode 1200 mW/cm2, at 50-60 ºC, for 60 sec.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Clinical success assessment measurement
Time Frame: 12 months.
All restorations were evaluated by using Modified US Public Health Service criteria (modified USPHS criteria). Marginal Integrity (MI)), Marginal Discoloration (MD), Secondary Caries (SC), Anatomic Form (AF), and retention (R) were evaluated. A restoration was considered a failure when codes Charlie (C) and D (Delta) were registered. Codes A (Alpha) and B (Bravo) was considered a success or acceptable. follow up period was baseline, 6th months, 12th months.
12 months.

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

December 1, 2015

Primary Completion (Actual)

August 1, 2016

Study Completion (Actual)

September 1, 2017

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 17, 2020

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 28, 2020

First Posted (Actual)

March 2, 2020

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 2, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 28, 2020

Last Verified

February 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • MarmaraU

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Dental Caries

Clinical Trials on Glass -Ionomer Cement with /without Led Light Cure

Subscribe