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.