Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Two-year clinical performance of glass ionomer and resin composite restorations in xerostomic head- and neck-irradiated cancer patients

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Expression of concern to this article was published on 13 July 2019

An Expression of concern to this article was published on 13 July 2019

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of adhesive filling materials in class V cavities in xerostomic head- and neck-irradiated cancer patients, in terms of marginal adaptation, anatomical form and recurrent caries. We selected 35 high-caries-risk, post-radiation, xerostomic adults with ≥3 cervical carious lesions in the same arch. Every patient received a KetacFil (KF), PhotacFil (PF) and Herculite XRV (HX) restoration. Patients were instructed to use a neutral 1% sodium fluoride gel in custom trays, on a daily basis. After 6, 12, 18 and 24 months, the restorations were examined for material loss, marginal integrity and recurrent caries. Fluoride compliance was determined at each recall appointment and recorded as the percentage of recommended use during that interval [compliance of ≤50% = NFUs, >50% = FUs]. Only 30 patients were available for recall at 6 months, with 28 patients at 12 and 18 months, and 27 patients at 24 months. In the NFU group, differences in recurrent caries were found between KF and HX at all observation times (p < 0.05). Differences (p < 0.05) in adaptation and/or anatomical form were found between KF and PF in NFUs after 18 and 24 months. In FUs, significant differences were observed between KF and PF, and KF and HX after 6 and 12 months, between KF and HX, PF and HX after 18 and 24 months. In summary, glass ionomers (especially the conventionally setting formulation) provide clinical caries inhibition but erode easily, while composite resin provides greater structural integrity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Frank RM, Herdly J, Philippe E (1965) Acquired dental defects and salivary gland lesions after irradiation for carcinoma. J Am Dent Assoc 70:868–683

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brown LR, Dreizen S, Handler S, Johnston DA (1975) Effect of radiation-induced xerostomia on human oral microflora. J Dent Res 54:740–750

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Jongebloed WLS, Gravenmade EJ, Retief DH (1988) Radiation caries. A review and SEM study. Am J Dent 1:139–146

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Pyykönen JG, Malmström M, Oikarinen VJ, Salmo M, Vehkalahti M (1986) Late effects of radiation treatment of tongue and floor-of-mouth-cancer on the dentition, saliva secretion, mucous membranes and lower jaw. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 15:401–409

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dreizen S, Brown LR, Thomas TE et al (1977) Prevention of xerostomia-related dental caries in irradiated cancer patients. J Dent Res 56:99–104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wood RE, Maxymiw WG, McComb D (1993) A clinical comparison of glass ionomer (polyalkenoate) and silver amalgam restorations in the treatment of class 5 caries in xerostomic head and neck cancer patients. Oper Dent 18:94–102

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sennhenn-Kirchner S, Freund F, Grundmann S, Martin A, Borg-von Zpelin M, Christiansen H, Wolff HA, Jocobs H-G (2009) Dental therapy before and after radiotherapy—an evaluation on patients with head and neck malignancies. Clin Oral Investig 13:157–164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kielbassa AM, Hinkelbein W, Hellwig E, Meyer-Lückel H (2006) Radiation-related damage to dentition. Lancet Oncol 7:326–335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Odlum O (1991) Preventive resins in the management of radiation-induced xerostomia complications. J Esthet Dent 3:227–229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mjör IA (1997) The reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in general dental practice. Acta Odontol Scand 55:58–63

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. McComb D, Erickson RL, Maxymiw WG, Wood RE (2002) A clinical comparison of glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer and resin composite restorations in the treatment of cervical caries in xerostomic head and neck radiation patients. Oper Dent 27:430–437

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Haveman CW, Summitt J, Burgess JO, Carlson K (2003) Three restorative materials and topical fluoride gel used in xerostomic patients. J Am Dent Assoc 134:177–184

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hu JY, Smales RJ, Yip KHK (2002) Restoration of teeth with more viscous glass ionomer cements following radiation induced caries. Int Dent J 52:445–448

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hu JY, Chen XC, Li YQ, Smales RJ, Yip KH (2005) Radiation-induced root surface caries restored with glass-ionomer cement placed in conventional and ART cavity preparations: results of two years. Aust Dent J 50:186–190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. FDI policy statement (2006) Root surface caries in adults. Adopted by the FDI General Assembly: 24 September 2006. http://www.fdiworldental.org/federation/assets/statements/ENGLISH/Caries/Root_surface_caries_in_adults.pdf. Accessed on 15 Mar 2009

  16. Denham JW, Peters LJ, Johansen J et al (1999) Do acute mucosal reactions lead to consequential late reactions in patients with head and neck cancer? Radiother Oncol 52:157–164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Spoak CJ, Johnson G, Ekstrand J (1994) Caries incidence, salivary flow rate and efficacy of fluoride gel treatment in irradiated patients. Caries Res 28:388–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Epstein JB, van der Meji EH, Emerton SM et al (1995) Compliance with fluoride gel use in irradiated patients. Spec Care Dent 15:218–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Brennan MT, Woo S-B, Lockhart PB (2008) Dental treatment planning and management in the patient who has cancer. Dent Clin North Am 52:19–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Daly TE, Drane JB (1976) Prevention and management of dental problems in irradiated patients. J Am Soc Prev Dent 6:21–25

    Google Scholar 

  21. Horiot JC, Schraub S, Bone MC et al (1983) Dental preservation in patients irradiated for head and neck tumours: a 10-year experience with topical fluoride and a randomized clinical trial between two fluoridation methods. Radiother Oncol 1:77–82

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jansma J, Vissink A, Gravenmade EJ et al (1989) In vivo study on the prevention of postradiation caries. Caries Res 23:172–178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Jansma J, Vissink A, Jongebloed L, Gravenmade EJ (1992) Xerostomie-gerelateerde cariës. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd 99:225–232

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Peumans M, Kanumilli P, de Munck J, Van landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B (2005) Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives: a systematic review of current clinical trials. Dent Mater 221:864–881

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Magni E, Ferrari M, Hickel R, Ilie N (2009) Evaluation of the mechanical properties of dental adhesives and glass-ionomer cements. Clin Oral Invest (in press)

  26. De Munck J, Van landuyt K, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Van Meerbeek (2005) A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results. J Dent Res 24:118–132

    Google Scholar 

  27. De Gee AJ, van Duinen RN, Werner A, Davidson CL (1996) Early and long-term wear of conventional and resin-modified glass ionomers. J Dent Res 75:1613–1619

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Peutzfeldt A, Garcia-Godoy F, Asmussen E (1997) Surface hardness and wear of glass ionomers and compomers. Am J Dent 10:15–17

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Guggenberger R, May R, Stefan KP (1998) New trends in glass-ionomer chemistry. Biomater 19:479–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. De Moor RJG, Verbeeck RMH (1998) The surface hardness of conventional restorative glass ionomer cements. Biomater 19:2269–2275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Ilie N, Hickel R (2007) Mechanical behaviour of glass ionomer cements as a function of loading and mixing procedure. Dent Mater J 26:526–533

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Dionysopoulos P, Gerasimou P, Tolidis K (2003) The effect of home-use fluoride gels on glass-ionomer, compomer and composite resin restorations. J Oral Rehabil 30:683–689

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. El-Badrawy WA, McComb D (1993) Effect of home-use fluoride gels on resin-modified glass-ionomer cements. Oper Dent 23:2–9

    Google Scholar 

  34. Burke FM, Ray NJ, McConnell RJ (2006) Fluoride-containing restorative materials. Int Dent J 56:33–43

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Saito S, Tosaki S, Hirota K (1999) Chapter 1. Characteristics of glass-ionomer cement. In: Davidson CL, Mjör IA (eds) Advances in glass-ionomer cements. Quintessenz, Berlin, pp 15–50

    Google Scholar 

  36. Yip HK, Lam WTC, Smales RJ (1999) Fluoride release, weight loss and erosive wear of modern aesthetic restoratives. Br Dent J 87:265–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Yip HK, Peng D, Smales RJ (2001) Effects of APF gel on the physical structure of compomers and glass ionomer cements. Oper Dent 26:231–238

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Hicks J, Garcia Godoy F, Donly K, Flaitz C (2002) Fluoride-releasing restorative materials and secondary caries. Dent Clin North Am 46:247–276

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Wiegand A, Buchalla W, Attin T (2007) Review on fluoride-releasing restorative materials—fluoride release and uptake characteristics, antibacterial activity and influence on caries formation. Dent Mater 23:343–362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Sennou HE, Lebugle AA, Grégoire GL (1999) X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy study of the dentin-glass ionomer cement interface. Dent Mater 15:229–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Gao W, Smales RJ, Gale MS (2000) Fluoride release/uptake from newer glass ionomer cements used with the ART approach. Am J Dent 13:201–204

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Massara MLA, Alves JB, Brandao PRG (2002) Atraumatic restorative treatment: clinical, ultrastructural and chemical analysis. Caries Res 36:430–436

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Verbeeck RMH, De Maeyer EA, Marks LA, De Moor RJG, De Witte AM, Trimpeneers LM (1998) Fluoride release process of (resin-modified) glass-ionomer cements versus (polyacid-modified) composites. Biomater 19:509–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Vermeersch G, Leloup G, Vreven J (2001) Fluoride release from glass-ionomer cements, compomers and resin composites. J Oral Rehabil 28:26–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. De Moor RJG, Verbeeck RMH (1998) Effect of acetic acid on the fluoride release of restorative glass ionomer cements. Dent Mater 14:261–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. De Moor RJG, Martens LC, Verbeeck RMH (2005) Effect of neutral citrate solution on the fluoride release of conventional restorative glass ionomer cements. Dent Mater 21:318–323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of Interest

None

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Operative Dentistry and Endodontology, Dental School, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185/P8, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Roeland J. G. De Moor, Inge G. Stassen, Yoke van ’t Veldt, Dries Torbeyns & Geert M. G. Hommez

Authors
  1. Roeland J. G. De Moor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Inge G. Stassen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yoke van ’t Veldt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dries Torbeyns
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Geert M. G. Hommez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roeland J. G. De Moor.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

De Moor, R.J.G., Stassen, I.G., van ’t Veldt, Y. et al. Two-year clinical performance of glass ionomer and resin composite restorations in xerostomic head- and neck-irradiated cancer patients. Clin Oral Invest 15, 31–38 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-009-0355-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-009-0355-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation