Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Oct;14(4):409-13.
doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.87214.

Clinical evaluation of giomer- and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in class V noncarious cervical lesions: An in vivo study

Kn Jyothi  1 , S Annapurna, Anil S Kumar, P Venugopal, Cm Jayashankara
Affiliations

Clinical evaluation of giomer- and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in class V noncarious cervical lesions: An in vivo study

Kn Jyothi et al. J Conserv Dent. 2011 Oct.

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate and compare the clinical performance of Giomer (Beautifil II) and RMGIC (Fuji II LC) in noncarious cervical lesions.

Materials and methods: Thirty-two subjects with one or two pairs of noncarious cervical lesions were included in the study. Each pair of lesion was restored with either giomer or RMGIC assigned randomly. Clinical evaluation of restorations was done using USPHS criteria. Data was formulated in a predesigned format and subjected to statistical analysis using the chi square test.

Results: Statistically significant difference was found between RMGIC and Giomer with respect to surface roughness with P value <0.001.

Conclusion: Giomer showed superior surface finish compared to RMGIC. Both Giomer and RMGIC showed equal retention ability.

Keywords: Giomer; United States Public Health Criteria; noncarious cervical lesions; prereacted glass fillers; resin-modified glass ionomer cement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Heymann HO, Sturdevant JR, Bayne S, Wilder AD, Sluder TB, Brunson WD. Examining tooth flexure effect on cervical restorations: A 2 year clinical study. J Am Dent Assoc. 1991;122:41–7. - PubMed
    1. Non carious cervical lesions. Recommendations for clinical practiceOper Dent. 2003;28:109–13. - PubMed
    1. Bracket WW, Browing WD, Ross A, Bracket MG. Two year clinical performance of a poly acid modified resin composite and RMGIC restorative material. Oper Dent. 2001;26:12–6. - PubMed
    1. Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems for restoration of non carious cervical lesions. Oper Dent. 2007;32:11–5. - PubMed
    1. Neo J, Chew CL. Direct tooth coloured materials for non carious lesions: A three year clinical report. Quintessence Int. 1996;27:183–8. - PubMed