Comparative Evaluation of the Survival Rates of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment Restorations Using Bilayer Technique along with Nanofilled Coating in Primary Molars: A Clinical Study
Objective: To enhance the survival rate of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations using (class I and class II) bilayer technique of placing glass ionomer cement (GIC) along with nanofilled coating (NC) over the restorations, thereby improving longevity.
Study design: A total of 178 primary molars in 67 children were selected and randomly divided into four groups. Group IA was treated with a single layer of GIC, followed by a protective layer of petroleum jelly in class I restoration. Group IB was treated with a single layer of GIC, followed by a protective layer of petroleum jelly in class II restoration. Group IIA was treated with bilayer GIC restoration followed by NC of GC-Coat Plus in class I, whereas group IIB was treated with bilayer GIC restoration followed by GC-Coat Plus in class II. Clinical analysis of all three groups was performed at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months to evaluate the success of treatment procedures using predetermined criteria. Pearson's Chi-square and Kaplan–Meier estimates were utilized to evaluate the success of all four treatment procedures (p < 0.05).
Results: Out of 178 teeth, 33 teeth were in group IA, 36 teeth were in group IB, 43 teeth were in group IIA, and 40 teeth were available for evaluation at the end of the 12-month follow-up period. The overall success was determined to be 81% for group IA, 79.2% for group IB, 79.5% for group IIA, and 88.6% for IIB. At 6th-month follow-up, one clinical failure was observed in groups IA and IB. At 9 months follow-up, two clinical failures were observed in both group IA and group IB and three failures were observed in group IIB. At 12 months follow-up, four clinical failures were observed in group IA, three in group IB and one clinical failure was observed in group IIB. There was no statistically significant difference observed between the success of the four groups, suggesting that either of the techniques can be utilized for ART.
Conclusion: No statistically significant difference was observed between the survival of class I and class II restorations of both the groups, indicating that either single-layer or bilayer technique along with NC can be adopted for the management of dental caries in primary molars using the ART approach.
Frencken JE, Holmgren CJ. Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) for Dental Caries, 1st edition. Nijmegen: STI Book bv; 1999. pp. 39–54.
Frencken JE, Pilot T, Songpaisan Y, et al. Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) rationale, technique and development. J Public Health Dent 1996;56(3):135–140. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.1996.tb02423.x
Lo ECM, Luo Y, Fan MW, et al. Clinical investigation of two glass-ionomer restoratives used with the atraumatic restorative treatment approach in China: two-year results. Caries Res 2001;35(6):458–563. DOI: 10.1159/000047490
Lo ECM, Holmgren CJ. Provision of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations to Chinese pre-school children—a 30-month evaluation. Int J Paediatr Dent 2001;11(1):3–10. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-263x.2001.00232.x
Honkala E, Behbehani J, Inbricevic H, et al. The atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach to restoring primary teeth in a standard dental clinic. Int J Paediatr Dent 2003;13(3):172–179. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-263x.2003.00455.x
Phantumvanit P, Songpaisan Y, Pilot T, et al. Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART): a three-year community field trial in Thailand-survival of one-surface restorations in the permanent dentition. J Public Health Dent 1996;56(3):141–145. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.1996.tb02424.x
Salama FS, Riad MI, Abdel Megid FY. Microleakage and marginal gap formation of glass ionomer resin restorations. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1995;20(1):31–36.
Mhaville RJ, Amerongen WE, Mandari GJ. Residual caries and marginal integrity in relation to class II glass ionomer restorations in primary molars. Eur Arch Peadiatr Dent 2006;7(2):81–84. DOI: 10.1007/BF03320819
Roeleveld AC, Amerongen WE, Mandari GJ. Influence of residual caries and survival gaps on the survival rate of the class II glass ionomer restorations. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2006;7(2):85–91. DOI: 10.1007/BF03320820
Frencken JE, Hof MA, Amerongen WE, et al. Effectiveness of single –surface ART restorations in the permanent dentition: a meta-analysis. J Dent Res 2004;83(2):120–123. DOI: 10.1177/154405910408300207
Frencken JE, Helderman WH, Holmgren CJ, et al. The atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach for managing dental caries: a meta-analysis. Int Dent J 2006;56(6):345–351. DOI: 10.1111/j.1875-595x.2006.tb00339.x
Frencken JE, Taifour D, van 't Hof MA. Survival of ART and amalgam restorations in permanent teeth of children after 6.3 years. J Dent Res 2006;85(7):622–626. DOI: 10.1177/154405910608500708
Bonifacio CC, Amerongen WE, Meschini TG, et al. Flowable glass ionomer cement as a liner: improving marginal adaptation of atraumatic restorative treatment restorations. J Dent Child 2010;77(1):12–16.
Lenzi TL, Bonifácio CC, Bönecker M, et al. Flowable glass ionomer cement layer bonding to sound and carious primary dentin. J Dent Child 2013;80(1):20–24.
McLean JW, Wilson AD. The clinical development of the glass-ionomer cement II. Some clinical applications. Aust Dent J 1977;22(2):120–127. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.1977.tb04463.x
Nicholson JW, Czarneka B. Kinetic studies of the effect of varnish on water loss by glass-ionomer cements. Dent Mater 2007;23(12):1549–1552. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2007.02.004
Brito CR, Velasco LG, Bonini GA, et al. Glass ionomer cement hardness after different materials for surface protection. J Biomed Mater Res 2010;93(1):243–246. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.32524
Moshaverinia A, Ansari S, Movasaghi Z, et al. Modification of conventional glass-ionomer cements with N-vinylpyrrolidone containing polyacids, nano-hydroxy and fluoroapatite to improve mechanical properties. Dent Mater 2008;24(10):1381–1390. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2008.03.008
Hesse D, Bonifacio C, Bonecker M, et al. Survival rate of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations using a glass ionomer bilayer technique with a nanofilled coating: a bi–center randomized clinical trial. Pediatr Dent 2016;38(1):18–24.
Lyapina M, Tzekova M, Dencheva M, et al. Nano glass ionomer cements in modern restorative dentistry. J Int Med Assoc Bulgaria 2016;22(2):116–165. DOI: 10.5272/jimab.2016222.1160
Hesse D, Bonifacio C, Bonecker M, et al. Bilayer technique and Nanofilled coating increases success of approximal ART restorations: a randomized clinical trial. Int J Paediatr Dent 2016;26(3):231–239. DOI: 10.1111/ipd.12194
Pukallus ML, Ploka KA, Holcombe TF, et al. A randomized controlled trial of a 10% CPP-ACP cream to reduce mutans streptococci colonization. Pediatr Dent 2013;35(7):550–555.
Frencken J, Pilot T, Amerongen E, et al. Manual for the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment Approach to Control Dental Caries, 3rd edition. Groningen: Who Collaborating Centre for Oral Health Services Research; 1997. pp. 103–120.
Chkir AF, Salem KB, Volu KA. Atraumatic restorative treatment and glass ionomer sealants in Tunisian children: survival after 3 years. East Mediter Health J 2002;23:200–204.
Anusavice KJ. Does ART have a place in preservative dentistry? Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1997;27(6):442–448. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1999.tb02046.x
Raggio DP, Hesse D, Lenzi TL, et al. Is ART an option for restoring occlusoproximal caries in primary teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Pediatr Dent 2013;23(6):435–443. DOI: 10.1111/ipd.12013
Bonifacio CC, de Jager N, Kleverlaan CJ. Mechanical behavior of a bi-layer glass ionomer. Dent Mater 2013;29(10):1020–1025. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2013.07.008
Swiftr E, Perdigao J, Heymann HO. Bonding to enamel and dentin: a brief history and state of the art. Quintessence Int 1995;26(2):95–110.
Ngo H, Mount G, Peters Me. A study of glass ionomer cement and its interface with enamel and dentin using a low-temperature, high-resolution scanning electron microscopic technique. Quintessence Int 1997;28(1):63–69.
da Franca C, Colares V, Van Amerongen E. Two years evaluation of ART approach in primary molars class I and II restorations. Int J Peadiatr dent 2011;21(4):249–253. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2011.01125.x
Bonifacio C, Hesse D, Raggio D, et al. The effect of GIC brand on the survival rate of proximal ART restorations. Int J. Pediatr Dent 2013;23(4):251–258. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2012.01259.x
Deepa G, Shobha T. A clinical evaluation of two glass ionomer cements in primary molars using atraumatic restorative treatment technique in India: 1-year follow-up. Int J Paediatr Dent 2010;20(6):410–418. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2010.01067.x
Amorim RG, Leal SC, Frencken JE. Survival of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) sealants and restorations: a meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig 2012;16(2):429–441. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-011-0513-3
Frencken JE, Makoni F, Sithole WD, et al. Three-year survival of one-surface ART restorations and glass-ionomer sealants in a school oral health programme in Zimbabwe. Caries Res 1998;32(2):119–126. DOI: 10.1159/000016441
Holmgren CJ, Lo EC, Hu D, et al. ART restorations and sealants placed in Chinese school children – results after three years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2000;28(4):314–320. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0528.2000.280410.x
Ersin NK, Candan U, Aykut A, et al. A clinical evaluation of resin-based composite and glass ionomer cement restorations placed in primary teeth using the ART approach: results at 24 months. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137(11):1529–1536. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0087
Cefaly DF, Barata Tde J, Tapety CM, et al. Clinical evaluation of multisurface ART restorations. J Appl Oral Sci 2005;13(1):159. DOI: 10.1590/s1678-77572005000100004
Mallow PK, Durward CS, Klaipo M. Restoration of permanent teeth in young rural children in Cambodia using the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) thechnique and Fuji II glass ionomer cement. Int J Paediatr Dent 1998;8(1):35–40. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-263x.1998.00058.x
De Gee AJ, van Duinen RN, Werner A, et al. Early and long-term wear of conventional and resin-modified glass ionomers. J Dent Res 2006;75(8):1613–1619. DOI: 10.1177/00220345960750081401
Mount GJ. Longevity in glass-ionomer restorations: review of a successful technique. Quintessence Int 1997;28(10):643–650.
Kamatham R, Reddy J. Surface coatings on glass ionomer restorations in pediatric dentistry-Worthy or not? J Ind Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2013;31(4):229–233. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.121818
Lohbauer U, Krämer N, Siedschlag G, et al. Strength and wear resistance of a dental glass-ionomer cement with a novel nanofilled resin coating. Am J Dent 2011;24(2):124–128.
Bonifacio CC, Werner A, Kleverlaan CJ. Coating glass-ionomer cements with a nanofilled resin. Acta Odontol Scand 2012;70(6):471–477. DOI: 10.3109/00016357.2011.639307
Bonifacio C, Kleverlaan CJ, Raggio DP, et al. Physical-mechanical properties of glass ionomer cements indicated for atraumatic restorative treatment. Aust Dent J 2009;54(3):233–237. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2009.01125.x
Kikwilu E, Frencken J, Mulder J. Impact of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) on the treatment profile in pilot government dental clinics in Tanzania. BMC Oral Health 2009;9:1–7. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6831-9-14
Diem VT, Tyas MJ, Ngo HC, et al. The effect of a nano-filled resin coating on the 3-year clinical performance of a conventional high-viscosity glass ionomer cement. Clin Oral Investig 2014;18(3):753–759. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-013-1026-z
Fried K, Hiller KA, Friedl KH. Clinical performance of a new glass-ionomer based restoration system: a retrospective cohort study. Dent Mater 2011;27(10):1031–1037. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.07.004
Fraji F, Heshmat H, Banava S. Effect of protective coating on microhardness of a new glasss ionomer cement: nanofilled coating versus unfilled resin: J Conserv Dent 2017;20(4):260–263. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_83_16
