Clinical Performance of Resin Composite with Surface Prereacted Glass Ionomer Liner vs Resin-modified Glass Ionomer in Class V Carious Lesions: An 18-month Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose: This trial evaluated the clinical performance of resin composite with a surface prereacted glass ionomer (S-PRG) liner compared to resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) in class V cavities after 18 months. Materials and methods: A total of 30 individuals with moderate to deep cervical carious cavities were allocated randomly to two groups (<i>n</i> = 15 each). The intervention group was treated with resin composite restorations (G-ænial A’CHORD, GC Corporation) and an S-PRG liner (PRG Barrier Coat, Shofu Dental Corporation). The control group was treated with RMGI restorations (Fuji II LC, GC Corporation). Each material was applied as per the manufacturer’s instructions. The restorations were assessed using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria at baseline and at 6, 12, and 18 months. Statistical analysis was performed with significance level at <i>p</i> ≤ 0.05. Categorical data were presented as frequencies and percentages. The Chi-squared test was used for intergroup comparisons, while Cochran’s Q test was used for intragroup comparisons. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan–Meier analysis and log-rank test. Results: After 18 months, intergroup comparisons revealed no statistically significant differences in all tested clinical parameters (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Intragroup comparisons showed a significant change in marginal discoloration over time in the resin composite with S-PRG liner group (<i>p</i> = 0.017). In survival analysis, resin composite with S-PRG liner demonstrated 73.3% alpha scores, while RMGI showed 86.6% alpha scores, with no significant difference (<i>p</i> = 0.3711), and all restorations were considered successful. Conclusion: Both resin composite with an S-PRG liner and RMGI exhibited acceptable performance in cervical carious lesions after 18 months. Resin composite with S-PRG liner can be an effective approach for restoring moderate to deep class V carious cavities. Trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, (NCT05930548). How to cite this article: Salah NA, Elghandour I, Kamal D. Clinical Performance of Resin Composite with Surface Prereacted Glass Ionomer Liner vs Resin-modified Glass Ionomer in Class V Carious Lesions: An 18-month Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2025;15(2):69–75.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry
Published
2025-06-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1496
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Dental Research and COVID-19
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.82
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Clinical Performance of Resin Composite with Surface Prereacted Glass Ionomer Liner vs Resin-modified Glass Ionomer in Class V Carious Lesions: An 18-month Randomized Clinical Trial

Dina Kamal, Inas Elghandour, Nouran Yousef Salah
1 citations
International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry
Dental Research and COVID-19
2.82
article

Clinical Performance of Resin Composite with Surface Prereacted Glass Ionomer Liner vs Resin-modified Glass Ionomer in Class V Carious Lesions: An 18-month Randomized Clinical Trial

Dina Kamal, Inas Elghandour, Nouran Yousef Salah
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Purpose: This trial evaluated the clinical performance of resin composite with a surface prereacted glass ionomer (S-PRG) liner compared to resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) in class V cavities after 18 months. Materials and methods: A total of 30 individuals with moderate to deep cervical carious cavities were allocated randomly to two groups (<i>n</i> = 15 each). The intervention group was treated with resin composite restorations (G-ænial A’CHORD, GC Corporation) and an S-PRG liner (PRG Barrier Coat, Shofu Dental Corporation). The control group was treated with RMGI restorations (Fuji II LC, GC Corporation). Each material was applied as per the manufacturer’s instructions. The restorations were assessed using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria at baseline and at 6, 12, and 18 months. Statistical analysis was performed with significance level at <i>p</i> ≤ 0.05. Categorical data were presented as frequencies and percentages. The Chi-squared test was used for intergroup comparisons, while Cochran’s Q test was used for intragroup comparisons. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan–Meier analysis and log-rank test. Results: After 18 months, intergroup comparisons revealed no statistically significant differences in all tested clinical parameters (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Intragroup comparisons showed a significant change in marginal discoloration over time in the resin composite with S-PRG liner group (<i>p</i> = 0.017). In survival analysis, resin composite with S-PRG liner demonstrated 73.3% alpha scores, while RMGI showed 86.6% alpha scores, with no significant difference (<i>p</i> = 0.3711), and all restorations were considered successful. Conclusion: Both resin composite with an S-PRG liner and RMGI exhibited acceptable performance in cervical carious lesions after 18 months. Resin composite with S-PRG liner can be an effective approach for restoring moderate to deep class V carious cavities. Trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, (NCT05930548). How to cite this article: Salah NA, Elghandour I, Kamal D. Clinical Performance of Resin Composite with Surface Prereacted Glass Ionomer Liner vs Resin-modified Glass Ionomer in Class V Carious Lesions: An 18-month Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2025;15(2):69–75.

International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative DentistryVol. 15(2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Dental Research and COVID-19
2.82
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.