Search

This study was a randomized controlled clinical trial with two parallel arms and the objective was to compare the survival of resin modified glass ionomer (RMGIC) restorations in primary teeth using rubber dam or cotton roll isolation after a 30-month follow-up period. Ninety-two children (mean age 6.8 ± 1.37) and 200 primary molars with occlusal or occluso-proximal cavitated dentin caries lesions were randomly assigned into two groups: cotton rolls and rubber dam. All lesions were restored using RMGIC (RIVA Light Cure) after selective caries removal. Restorative failure and lesion arrestment were evaluated by two independent, trained, and calibrated examiners through clinical and radiographic examinations. The Kaplan-Meier test was used to assess the survival of restorations and Cox regression was used to assess the association of risk factors with restorative failure. There was no significant difference in survival rates between groups (p = 0.17). Older age (HR = 2.81 [95%CI: 1.47-5.44]) and higher rate of gingival bleeding (HR = 0.47 [95%CI: 0.23-0.99]) were associated with restorative failure. No patient had painful symptoms, pulp outcomes, or radiographic changes compatible with lesion progression. The use of rubber dam isolation did not increase the survival rate of occlusal and occluso-proximal restorations using RMGIC in primary molars after 30 months of follow-up. Since the survival is not influenced by the type of isolation, the professional can safely choose the appropriate technique for each case, considering his experience and preferences, as well as those of the patient.

Objective: To compare the survival of occlusal and occlusal-proximal restorations performed with resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC) in deciduous molars using rubber dam and cotton rolls isolation. Material and Methods: Ninety-two patients were included and 200 deciduous molars with cavitated occlusal or occlusoproximal dentin caries lesions were randomized into two groups: cotton rolls (n = 100) and rubber dam (n = 100) and RMGIC restorations were placed. At baseline and in the follow-up visit, presence, severity and activity of caries lesions were registered. Two independent, blinded examiners evaluated the treated teeth clinically using the USPHS criteria and radiographically after 9 months. Descriptive analysis, survival curve (log-rank test) and Cox regression were performed to assess risk factors related to failure. Results: Out of the 179 teeth (92 cotton rolls group and 87 rubber dam group) evaluated at 9-month follow-up period. No lesion progression was observed radiographically. The overall treatment success rate was 85.47% (83.47% for cotton rolls and 87.35 rubber dam group). No significant difference between isolation methods was observed in the log-rank test (p = 0.16). Cox regression showed no risk factors related to failure. Conclusion: No difference was found in the survival of occlusal and occlusal-proximal restorations performed with RMGIC in deciduous molars using a rubber dam and cotton rolls isolation after a 9-month follow-up period.