Volume 10, Issue 3 (9-2025)
J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci 2025, 10(3): 248-261 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IR.SBMU.DRC.REC.1399.019
Clinical trials code: IR.SBMU.DRC.REC.1399.019
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Valian A, Madani T, Kheirkhah Dabbagh N. A Comparative Analysis of Resin-Modified Glass Ionomers and Composite Resins for Restoration of Non-Carious Cervical Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci 2025; 10 (3) :248-261
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-701-en.html
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-701-en.html
1- Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
2- Undergraduate Student, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3- Department of Restorative Dentistry, TeMS.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. ,Kheirkhahneda.nk@gmail.com
2- Undergraduate Student, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3- Department of Restorative Dentistry, TeMS.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. ,
Abstract: (28 Views)
Background and Aim: The objective of this review was to assess the clinical efficacy of resin-modified glass ionomers (RMGIs) and composite resins for management of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs).
Materials and Methods: A systematic search was conducted using the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, MEDLINE via Ovid, EMBASE via Ovid, and PubMed Health, with no restrictions on language up to 2021. The review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a minimum follow-up period of 12 months, comparing RMGI restorations to composite resin restorations in adult populations with NCCLs. The primary outcomes assessed were retention rate, marginal integrity, and marginal discoloration. The search results were rigorously screened, and relevant trial data were extracted. Additionally, the risk of bias for the included studies was evaluated. The results were presented as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and a meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5).
Results: Of 978 retrieved references, 12 trials (15 articles) were included in this systematic review. Nine trials were split-mouth studies involving 414 RMGI restorations and 454 composite restorations. The remaining three trials were parallel group studies involving 83 RMGI restorations and 131 composite restorations. The meta-analysis showed that RMGI restorations had a significantly lower failure rate (RR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.52) than composite restorations. However, no significant difference was found between the two materials for marginal integrity and marginal discoloration (P>0.05).
Conclusion: RMGI restorations exhibited superior clinical performance regarding the retention rate for NCCLs.
Materials and Methods: A systematic search was conducted using the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, MEDLINE via Ovid, EMBASE via Ovid, and PubMed Health, with no restrictions on language up to 2021. The review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a minimum follow-up period of 12 months, comparing RMGI restorations to composite resin restorations in adult populations with NCCLs. The primary outcomes assessed were retention rate, marginal integrity, and marginal discoloration. The search results were rigorously screened, and relevant trial data were extracted. Additionally, the risk of bias for the included studies was evaluated. The results were presented as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and a meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5).
Results: Of 978 retrieved references, 12 trials (15 articles) were included in this systematic review. Nine trials were split-mouth studies involving 414 RMGI restorations and 454 composite restorations. The remaining three trials were parallel group studies involving 83 RMGI restorations and 131 composite restorations. The meta-analysis showed that RMGI restorations had a significantly lower failure rate (RR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.52) than composite restorations. However, no significant difference was found between the two materials for marginal integrity and marginal discoloration (P>0.05).
Conclusion: RMGI restorations exhibited superior clinical performance regarding the retention rate for NCCLs.
Keywords: Composite Resins, Dental Restoration, Temporary, Glass Ionomer Cements, Evidence-Based Medicine
Type of Study: Review article |
Subject:
Restorative Dentistry
References
1. Kikly A, Jaâfoura S, Bouslema A, Garouachi E, Belghuith AC. Non-Carious Cervical Lesions: From Diagnosis to Treatment. Ameri J Clin Med Re: AJCMR. 2024;116.
2. Villamayor KGG, Codas-Duarte D, Ramirez I, Souza-Gabriel AE, Sousa-Neto MD, Candemil AP. Morphological characteristics of non-carious cervical lesions. A systematic review. Arch Oral Biol. 2024 Nov;167:106050. [DOI:10.1016/j.archoralbio.2024.106050] [PMID]
3. Goodacre CJ, Eugene Roberts W, Munoz CA. Noncarious cervical lesions: Morphology and progression, prevalence, etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical guidelines for restoration. J Prosthodont. 2023 Feb;32(2):e1-e18. [DOI:10.1111/jopr.13585]
4. Gomes RR, Zeola LF, Barbosa TAQ, Fernandes Neto AJ, de Araujo Almeida G, Soares PV. Prevalence of non-carious cervical lesions and orthodontic treatment: a retrospective study. Prog Orthod. 2022 May 16;23(1):17. [DOI:10.1186/s40510-022-00409-4] [PMID] []
5. Intaraprasong N, Banomyong D, Chotvorrarak K, Ngoenwiwatkul Y, Pittayachawan P. Influence of Different Post-endodontic Restorations on the Survival Rate Against Fracture of Endodontically Treated Anterior Teeth Affected by Cervical Lesions with Pulpal Involvement: A Retrospective Clinical Study. Eur Endod J. 2024 Jan 1;9(1):44-56. [DOI:10.14744/eej.2023.15870] [PMID] []
6. Zakirulla M, Alhaydan AY, Alqahtani MS, Abdullah SM, Alkhammash SM, Ulhaqban HA, Alqahtani HS, Alshehri Y, Alharbi MM, Alharbi RM, Al Moadi RA. Prevalence and Characteristics of Non-Carious Cervical Lesions in Abha City, Saudi Arabia. Bahrain Med Bull. 2024 Mar 1;46(1).
7. Medeiros TLM, Mutran SCAN, Espinosa DG, do Carmo Freitas Faial K, Pinheiro HHC, D'Almeida Couto RS. Prevalence and risk indicators of non-carious cervical lesions in male footballers. BMC Oral Health. 2020 Jul 29;20(1):215. [DOI:10.1186/s12903-020-01200-9] [PMID] []
8. Bomfim RA, Crosato E, Mazzilli LE, Frias AC. Prevalence and risk factors of non-carious cervical lesions related to occupational exposure to acid mists. Braz Oral Res. 2015;29:S1806-83242015000100280. [DOI:10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0085] [PMID]
9. Kitasako Y, Ikeda M, Takagaki T, Burrow MF, Tagami J. The prevalence of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) with or without erosive etiological factors among adults of different ages in Tokyo. Clin Oral Investig. 2021 Dec;25(12):6939-47. [DOI:10.1007/s00784-021-03984-8] [PMID]
10. Salas MM, Nascimento GG, Huysmans MC, Demarco FF. Estimated prevalence of erosive tooth wear in permanent teeth of children and adolescents: an epidemiological systematic review and meta-regression analysis. J. Dent . 2015;43(1):42-50. [DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2014.10.012] [PMID]
11. Arafa A, Filfilan SS, Fansa HA. Erosive effect of beverages on surface hardness and ultra-structure of deciduous teeth enamel. Pediatric Dental Journal. 2022 Dec 1;32(3):186-92. [DOI:10.1016/j.pdj.2022.08.001]
12. Sognnaes RF, Wolcott RB, Xhonga FA. Dental erosion. I. Erosion-like patterns occurring in association with other dental conditions. J Am Dent Assoc. 1972 Mar;84(3):571-6. [DOI:10.14219/jada.archive.1972.0116] [PMID]
13. Duangthip D, Man A, Poon PH, Lo ECM, Chu CH. Occlusal stress is involved in the formation of non-carious cervical lesions. A systematic review of abfraction. Am J Dent. 2017 Aug;30(4):212-20.
14. Rees J, Hammadeh M, Jagger D. Abfraction lesion formation in maxillary incisors, canines and premolars: a finite element study. Eur. J Oral Sci. 2003;111(2):149-54. [DOI:10.1034/j.1600-0722.2003.00018.x] [PMID]
15. Poiate IAVP, Muramatsu M, Mori M, Campos TT, Matsuda K, Lopez MAPA, et al. Abfraction lesion in central incisor tooth: Displacement and stress evaluation by laser speckle and finite element analysis. Med Res Arch. 2023;11(8). [DOI:10.18103/mra.v11i8.4220]
16. Goradia Y, Gouasmi S, Reffas SA. Influence of Mechanical Properties of Dental Implants on Biomechanical Behavior: A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis. J Biomim. 2024 Apr 15;64:39-54. [DOI:10.4028/p-g22CO2]
17. Grippo JO, Simring M, Schreiner S. Attrition, abrasion, corrosion and abfraction revisited: a new perspective on tooth surface lesions. J Am Dent Assoc. 2004;135(8):1109-18. [DOI:10.14219/jada.archive.2004.0369] [PMID]
18. Singh TK, Johnson AJ, Gupta A, Gill I. Novel 3-dimensional classification of cervical abrasion using CBCT: A comprehensive analysis. J Oral Biol. Craniofac. Res. 2024;14(5):638-44. [DOI:10.1016/j.jobcr.2024.08.007] [PMID] []
19. Karan K, Yao X, Xu C, Wang Y. Chemical profile of the dentin substrate in non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent. Mater. 2009;25(10):1205-12. [DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2009.04.006] [PMID] []
20. Gutierrez B, Goyes H, Perez J, Arango M. Non-carious Cervical Lesions, an Approach of the Associated Factors in a Teaching Service Clinic. 2024. [DOI:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4688481/v1]
21. Kong W, Ma H, Qiao F, Xiao M, Wang L, Zhou L, et al. Risk factors for noncarious cervical lesions: A case-control study. J Oral Rehabil. 2024;51(9):1684-91. [DOI:10.1111/joor.13772] [PMID]
22. Mehta SB, Banerji S, Millar BJ, Suarez-Feito J-M. Current concepts on the management of tooth wear: part 4. An overview of the restorative techniques and dental materials commonly applied for the management of tooth wear. Br Dent J. 2012;212(4):169-77. [DOI:10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.137] [PMID]
23. Grippo JO, Simring M, Coleman TA. Abfraction, abrasion, biocorrosion, and the enigma of noncarious cervical lesions: a 20‐year perspective. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2012;24(1):10-23. [DOI:10.1111/j.1708-8240.2011.00487.x] [PMID]
24. Özgöz M, Arabaci T, Sümbüllü MA, Demir T. Relationship between handedness and toothbrush-related cervical dental abrasion in left-and right-handed individuals. J Dent Sci. 2010;5(4):177-82. [DOI:10.1016/j.jds.2010.11.001]
25. Badavannavar AN, Ajari S, Nayak KUS, Khijmatgar S. Abfraction: Etiopathogenesis, clinical aspect, and diagnostic-treatment modalities: A review. Indian J Dent Res. 2020 Mar-Apr;31(2):305-11. [DOI:10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_863_18] [PMID]
26. Nascimento MM, Dilbone DA, Pereira PN, Duarte WR, Geraldeli S, Delgado AJ. Abfraction lesions: etiology, diagnosis, and treatment options. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2016 May 3;8:79-87. [DOI:10.2147/CCIDE.S63465] [PMID] []
27. Roberts WE, Mangum JE, Schneider PM. Pathophysiology of Demineralization, Part I: Attrition, Erosion, Abfraction, and Noncarious Cervical Lesions. Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2022 Feb;20(1):90-105. [DOI:10.1007/s11914-022-00722-1] [PMID] []
28. Costăchel BC, Bechir A, Burcea A, Mihai LL, Ionescu T, Marcu OA, Bechir ES. Evaluation of Abfraction Lesions Restored with Three Dental Materials: A Comparative Study. Clin Pract. 2023 Aug 26;13(5):1043-58. [DOI:10.3390/clinpract13050093] [PMID] []
29. Costăchel BC, Bechir A, Târcolea M, Mihai LL, Burcea A, Bechir ES. The Stresses and Deformations in the Abfraction Lesions of the Lower Premolars Studied by the Finite Element Analyses: Case Report and Review of Literature. Diagnostics (Basel). 2024 Apr 9;14(8):788. [DOI:10.3390/diagnostics14080788] [PMID] []
30. Duangthip D, Man A, Poon PH, Lo ECM, Chu CH. Occlusal stress is involved in the formation of non-carious cervical lesions. A systematic review of abfraction. Am J Dent. 2017 Aug;30(4):212-20.
31. Haskell B, Stern JK, Ghiassi J, Kurialacherry A, Gaud-Quintana S, Peacock ME. Resolution of Abfraction-Associated Gingival Fenestration Utilizing Connective Tissue Grafting. Case Rep Dent. 2019 Jun 12;2019:6810670. [DOI:10.1155/2019/6810670] [PMID] []
32. Jakupović S, Šehić A, Julardžija F, Gavranović-Glamoč A, Sofić A, Bajsman A, Kazazić L. The Influence of Different Occlusal Loading on Six Restorative Materials for Restoration of Abfraction Lesions-Finite Element Analysis. Eur J Dent. 2022 Oct;16(4):886-94. [DOI:10.1055/s-0041-1741376] [PMID] []
33. Berzins DW, Abey S, Costache MC, Wilkie CA, Roberts HW. Resin-modified glass-ionomer setting reaction competition. J Dent Res. 2010 Jan;89(1):82-6. [DOI:10.1177/0022034509355919] [PMID] []
34. Roberts HW, Berzins DW. Early reaction kinetics of contemporary glass-ionomer restorative materials. J Adhes Dent. 2015 Feb;17(1):67-75.
35. Thomas JT, Roberts HW, Diaz L, Bradley TG, Berzins DW. Effect of light-cure initiation time on polymerization efficiency and orthodontic bond strength with a resin-modified glass-ionomer. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2012 May;15(2):124-34. [DOI:10.1111/j.1601-6343.2011.01531.x] [PMID]
36. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71. [DOI:10.1136/bmj.n71] [PMID] []
37. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Chichester: The Cochrane Collaboration and John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2008. [DOI:10.1002/9780470712184]
38. Adeleke, Oginni A. Clinical evaluation of resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions. J West Afr Coll Surg. 2012 Oct;2(4):21-37.
39. Brackett WW, Dib A, Brackett MG, Reyes AA, Estrada BE. Two-year clinical performance of Class V resin-modified glass-lonomer and resin composite restorations. Oper Dent. 2003 Sep-Oct;28(5):477-81.
40. Fagundes TC, Barata TJ, Bresciani E, Santiago S, Franco EB, Lauris JR, et al. Seven-year clinical performance of resin composite versus resin-modified glass ionomer restorations in noncarious cervical lesions. Oper Dent. 2014 Nov-Dec;39(6):578-87. [DOI:10.2341/13-054-C] [PMID]
41. Federlin M, Thonemann B, Schmalz G, Urlinger T. Clinical evaluation of different adhesive systems for restoring teeth with erosion lesions. Clin Oral Investig. 1998 Jun;2(2):58-66. [DOI:10.1007/s007840050046] [PMID]
42. Onal B, Pamir T. The two-year clinical performance of esthetic restorative materials in noncarious cervical lesions. J Am Dent Assoc. 2005 Nov;136(11):1547-55. [DOI:10.14219/jada.archive.2005.0085] [PMID]
43. Ozgünaltay G, Onen A. Three-year clinical evaluation of a resin modified glass-ionomer cement and a composite resin in non-carious class V lesions. J Oral Rehabil. 2002 Nov;29(11):1037-41. [DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2842.2002.00995.x] [PMID]
44. van Dijken JW. Clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems in class V non-carious lesions. Dent Mater. 2000 Jul;16(4):285-91. [DOI:10.1016/S0109-5641(00)00019-1] [PMID]
45. de Oliveira FG, Machado LS, Rocha EP, de Alexandre RS, Briso AL, Mazza ML, Sundfeld RH. Clinical evaluation of a composite resin and a resin modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions: one-year results. IJCD. 2012 Sep 18;5:1-1.
46. Gonçalves DFM, Shinohara MS, Carvalho PRMA, Ramos FSES, Oliveira LC, Omoto ÉM, et al. Three-year evaluation of different adhesion strategies in non-carious cervical lesion restorations: a randomized clinical trial. J Appl Oral Sci. 2021 Oct 22;29:e20210192 [DOI:10.1590/1678-7757-2021-0192] [PMID] []
47. Hussainy SN, Nasim I, Thomas T, Ranjan M. Clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, flowable composite, and polyacid-modified resin composite in noncarious cervical lesions: One-year follow-up. J Conserv Dent. 2018 Sep-Oct;21(5):510-5. [DOI:10.4103/JCD.JCD_51_18] [PMID] []
48. Perdigão J, Dutra-Corrêa M, Saraceni SH, Ciaramicoli MT, Kiyan VH. Randomized clinical trial of two resin-modified glass ionomer materials: 1-year results. Oper Dent. 2012 Nov-Dec;37(6):591-601. [DOI:10.2341/11-415-C] [PMID]
49. Popescu SM, Ţuculină MJ, Manolea HO, Mercuţ R, Scrieciu M. Randomized clinical trial of adhesive restorations in non carious cervical lesions. Key Engineering Materials. 2016 Jun 30;695:3-11. [DOI:10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.695.3]
50. Litaker MS, Gordan VV, Rindal DB, Fellows JL, Gilbert GH; National Dental PBRN Collaborative Group. Cluster Effects in a National Dental PBRN restorative study. J Dent Res. 2013 Sep;92(9):782-7. [DOI:10.1177/0022034513497752] [PMID] []
51. Boku GG, Garoma Abeya S, Ayers N, Abera Wordofa M. The Effect of School-Linked Module-Based Friendly-Health Education on Adolescents' Sexual and Reproductive Health Knowledge, Guji Zone, Ethiopia - Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial. Adolesc Health Med Ther. 2024 Jan 23;15:5-18 [DOI:10.2147/AHMT.S441957] [PMID] []
52. Chen J, Zhou X, Li F, Spiegelman D. swdpwr: A SAS macro and an R package for power calculations in stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2022 Jan;213:106522. [DOI:10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.106522] [PMID] []
53. Kennedy-Shaffer L, Hughes MD. Power and sample size calculations for cluster randomized trials with binary outcomes when intracluster correlation coefficients vary by treatment arm. Clin Trials. 2022 Feb;19(1):42-51. [DOI:10.1177/17407745211059845] [PMID] []
54. Crider K, Williams J, Qi YP, Gutman J, Yeung L, Mai C, et al. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. [DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD014217] [PMID] []
55. 55 Santos MJ, Ari N, Steele S, Costella J, Banting D. Retention of tooth-colored restorations in non-carious cervical lesions--a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(5):1369-81. [DOI:10.1007/s00784-014-1220-7] [PMID]
56. Matis BA, Cochran M, Carlson T. Longevity of glass-ionomer restorative materials: results of a 10-year evaluation. Quintessence Int. 1996 Jun;27(6):373-82.
57. Peumans M, De Munck J, Mine A, Van Meerbeek B. Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions. A systematic review. Dent Mater. 2014 Oct;30(10):1089-103. [DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2014.07.007] [PMID]
58. Arbildo-Vega HI, Cruzado-Oliva FH, Coronel-Zubiate FT, Luján-Valencia SA, Meza-Málaga JM, Aguirre-Ipenza R, et al. Clinical Effectiveness of Ion-Releasing Restorations versus Composite Restorations in Dental Restorations: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Dent J (Basel). 2024 May 24;12(6):158. [DOI:10.3390/dj12060158] [PMID] []
59. Ferraresso LFOT, Küster I, Besegato JF, Pfau EA, Hoeppner MG. Multidisciplinary management of a tooth with severe root dilaceration and enamel hypoplasia: a case report. Gen Dent. 2023 Sep-Oct;71(5):64-69.
60. V S R, Prabha J L, Priscilla Antony S D. Assessment of Occlusal Load Strength of Glass Ionomer Cement and Composite in Class V Cavities: An In-Vitro Study. Cureus. 2023 Nov 27;15(11):e49529.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
