A selection of abstracts of clinically relevant papers from other journals. The abstracts on this page have been chosen and edited by John R. Radford.
Abstract
No difference in cariostatic effect between resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (RM-GIC) and fluoride containing composites.
Main
Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V. J Oral Sci 2010; 52: 347–357
In this systematic review, 97 continuous data sets were analysed from 9 laboratory trials, 3 randomised in situ trials (participants wearing appliances containing enamel slabs) and one randomised control study. Although analysed separately, the authors concede that the inclusion of laboratory studies weaken any clinical implications. This systematic review found that there were no difference in cariostatic effect between RM-GIC and fluoride containing composites. However, when compared with a non-fluoride containing composite, RM-GIC showed a 'higher reduction of demineralization during caries challenge'. Nevertheless, there was no difference in cariostatic property between a non-fluoride containing composite resin and RM-GIC, if the participants used a fluoride containing toothpaste.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Demineralization of hard tooth tissue adjacent to resin-modified glass-ionomers and composite resins: a quantitative systematic review. Br Dent J 210, 259 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.215
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.215