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
Review
. 2021 Jul 14;14(14):3915.
doi: 10.3390/ma14143915.

Meta-Analysis of In-Vitro Bonding of Glass-Ionomer Restorative Materials to Primary Teeth

Tamara Peric  1 , Evgenija Markovic  2 , Dejan Markovic  1 , Bojan Petrovic  3
Affiliations
Review

Meta-Analysis of In-Vitro Bonding of Glass-Ionomer Restorative Materials to Primary Teeth

Tamara Peric et al. Materials (Basel). .

Abstract

Restoration of primary teeth is among the main clinical applications of glass-ionomer cements (GIC). The aim of the study was to review and summarize existing evidence of in vitro bond strength of glass-ionomer (GI) restoratives to enamel and dentin of primary teeth. A literature search was performed in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases to identify studies published until April 2021. The search strategy was: ("glass") and ("ionomer") and ("primary" or "deciduous") and ("bond" or "tensile" or "shear"). Two researchers independently retrieved articles that reported on the bond strength of GIC to primary dentin and/or enamel. The meta-analysis was performed to compare the bond strength values of conventional (C) GIC and resin-modified (RM) GIC to different substrates. From 831 potentially eligible articles, 30 were selected for the full-text examination, and 7 were included in the analysis. Studies were rated at high (3), medium (3), and low (1) risk of bias. RM-GIC showed higher bond strength to primary enamel and dentin compared to the C-GIC. Meta-analysis of in vitro studies, evaluating bonding properties of GI restoratives to primary teeth, suggests the superior performance of RM-GIC. However, there is a lack of studies that examine the properties of novel GI formulations.

Keywords: bond strength test; glass-ionomer cements; meta-analysis; primary teeth; restoration.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of study selection.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plot for the meta-analysis of C-GIC and RM-GIC immediate bond strength in primary enamel and dentin.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plot for the meta-analysis of C-GIC and RM-GIC long-term bond strength in primary enamel and dentin.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Sidhu S., Nicholson J. A review of glass-ionomer cements for clinical dentistry. J. Funct. Biomater. 2016;7:16. doi: 10.3390/jfb7030016. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Xie H., Zhang F., Wu Y., Chen C., Liu W. Dentine bond strength and microleakage of flowable composite, compomer and glass ionomer cement. Aust. Dent. J. 2008;53:325–331. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2008.00074.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Manton D.J., Bach K. The Role of Glass-ionomers in Paediatric Dentistry. In: Sidhu S.K., editor. Glass-Ionomers in Dentistry. Springer; Cham, Switzerland: 2016. pp. 113–123.
    1. Moshaverinia A., Roohpour N., Chee W.W.L., Schricker S.R. A review of powder modifications in conventional glass-ionomer dental cements. J. Mater. Chem. 2011;21:1319–1328. doi: 10.1039/C0JM02309D. - DOI
    1. Dias A.G.A., Magno M.B., Delbem A.C.B., Cunha R.F., Maia L.C., Pessan J.P. Clinical performance of glass ionomer cement and composite resin in Class II restorations in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Dent. 2018;73:1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2018.04.004. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources