Marginal adaptation (unacceptable marginal adaptation) · Patients with permanent dentition in need of restorations (all cavity types: Black's Class I, II, V, and non-carious cervical lesions)
Across follow-up periods, there was no statistically significant difference in unacceptable marginal adaptation between GIC and resin composite restorations.
3 findings from 1 review
Secondary caries and marginal adaptation of ion-releasing versus resin composite restorations: a systematic review and… 2022 All outcomes1 year, 18 months to 2 years, and 3 years · University, private practice, primary school, and multicenter settings · All types of cavities
RD 0.01 [-0.01, 0.03]
9 studies · 2725 participants
GRADE not reported
Secondary caries and marginal adaptation of ion-releasing versus resin composite restorations: a systematic review and… 2022 All outcomes3 years · University, private practice, primary school, and multicenter settings · All types of cavities
RD 0.00 [-0.02, 0.02]
3 studies · 321 participants
Low
Secondary caries and marginal adaptation of ion-releasing versus resin composite restorations: a systematic review and… 2022 All outcomes1 year · University, private practice, primary school, and multicenter settings · All types of cavities
RD 0.01 [-0.02, 0.03]
9 studies · 1386 participants
Low
Secondary caries · Patients with permanent dentition in need of restorations (all cavity types: Black's Class I, II, V, and non-carious cervical lesions)
Ion-releasing GIC restorations may have little or no difference in secondary caries at 1 year (low certainty).
2 findings from 1 review
Secondary prevention of caries · children with deep occlusal carious lesions in permanent molars
No significant difference in secondary caries prevention was reported; no effect estimate or GRADE rating was reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Secondary prevention of caries · children with deep occlusal carious lesions in permanent molars
No significant difference in secondary caries prevention was reported; no effect estimate or GRADE rating was reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Secondary caries · Patients requiring dental restoration; permanent teeth
Over 1 year in permanent teeth, the effect of ACTIVA versus GIC on secondary caries is very uncertain (RR 22.80, 95% CI 0.89-584.17; very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Secondary caries · Patients requiring dental restoration; permanent teeth
Over 1 year in permanent teeth, resin composite showed no statistically significant difference in secondary caries versus GIC (RR 3.05, 95% CI 0.95-9.79; low certainty).
2 findings from 1 review
Secondary caries · Patients requiring dental restoration; permanent teeth
Over 2 or more years in permanent teeth, the effect of compomer versus GIC on secondary caries is very uncertain (RR 3.20, 95% CI 0.59-17.33; very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Secondary caries · Patients requiring dental restoration; permanent teeth
Over 2 or more years in permanent teeth, secondary caries did not differ significantly between fluoride-containing amalgam and GIC (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.45-2.00; low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Secondary caries · Patients requiring dental restoration; permanent teeth
Over 2 or more years in permanent teeth, amalgam had a higher risk of secondary caries than GIC (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.04-3.09; low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review