en Restorative Dentistry Restorative Dentistry Review article Review article <div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:13pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span new="" roman="" style="font-family:" times=""><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span style="font-family:" verdana=""><span style="color:#2e74b5">Background and Aim</span></span></span></span></b><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span style="font-family:" verdana=""><span style="color:#2e74b5">:</span></span></span></span></b> <span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span style="font-family:" verdana="">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). &nbsp;</span></span></span>&nbsp;</span></span></span><br> <span style="font-size:13pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span new="" roman="" style="font-family:" times=""><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span style="font-family:" verdana=""><span style="color:#2e74b5">Materials and Methods: </span></span></span></span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span style="font-family:" verdana="">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). </span></span></span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span></span></span><br> <span style="font-size:13pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span new="" roman="" style="font-family:" times=""><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span style="font-family:" verdana=""><span style="color:#2e74b5">Results: </span></span></span></span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span style="font-family:" verdana=""><span style="color:#0e101a">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).</span></span></span></span><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""></span></span></span></span></span></span><br> <span style="font-size:13pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span new="" roman="" style="font-family:" times=""><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span style="font-family:" verdana=""><span style="color:#2e74b5">Conclusion:</span></span></span></span></b> <span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span style="font-family:" verdana=""><span style="color:#0e101a">RMGI restorations exhibited superior clinical performance regarding the retention rate for NCCLs.</span></span></span></span><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="line-height:107%"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""></span></span></span></span></span></span></div> Composite Resins, Dental Restoration, Temporary, Glass Ionomer Cements, Evidence-Based Medicine 248 261 http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-574-1&slc_lang=en&sid=1 Azam Valian avalian14@yahoo.com 100319475328460015523 100319475328460015523 No Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Tahoura Madani tahouramadani@gmail.com 100319475328460015524 100319475328460015524 No Undergraduate Student, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. Neda Kheirkhah Dabbagh Kheirkhahneda.nk@gmail.com 100319475328460015525 100319475328460015525 Yes Department of Restorative Dentistry, TeMS.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.