Effectiveness of Glass Ionomer Cements in the Restorative Treatment of Radiation-related Caries - a Systematic Review

Overview

Journal Support Care Cancer

Specialties Critical Care
Oncology

Date 2022 Jun 3

PMID 35657403

Authors

Jullyana Mayara P Dezanetti

Bruna Luiza Nascimento

Juliana S R Orsi

Evelise M Souza

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the clinical effectiveness of glass ionomer cements (GICs) compared to other restorative materials in the treatment of radiation-related caries.

Methods: Two independent researchers searched literature databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Lilacs/BBO) and the grey literature to identify clinical trials that compared GICs with other restorative materials for the treatment of radiation-related caries. The clinical criteria considered for the performance of the restorations were based on the parameters of marginal adaptation/anatomical form, secondary caries, retention, and cumulative failures of the restorations. The methodological quality and risk of bias were evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration tool.

Results: From a total of 511, only four articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Conventional GIC restorations presented higher marginal adaptation failures than the resin-modified glass ionomer cements (RM-GICs) and composite restorations in all of the follow-up periods. Secondary caries was not observed in conventional GIC restorations throughout the follow-up periods, in three out of four of the included studies. RM-GICs and composite restorations showed significantly lower cumulative failure rates than conventional GICs at 6-, 12-, and 18-month follow-ups.

Conclusion: Due to insufficient scientific evidence, it was not possible to conclude that GICs are more effective than other restorative materials for the treatment of radiation-related caries.

Citing Articles

Enhancing Wear Resistance in Glass Ionomer Cement through Green-mediated Chitosan-, Titanium-, Zirconium-, and Hydroxyapatite-based Nanocomposites: An Analysis before and after Chewing Simulator Endurance.

Sitaram S, Paulraj J, Maiti S, Shanmugam R Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2025; 17(11):1229-1235.

PMID: 39781388 PMC: 11703768. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2984.

Retrospective Clinical Evaluation of RMGIC/GIC Class V Restorations.

Santos M, Leon L, Siddique I, Butler S Dent J (Basel). 2023; 11(9).

PMID: 37754345 PMC: 10529511. DOI: 10.3390/dj11090225.

Impact of Irradiation on the Adhesive Performance of Resin-Based Dental Biomaterials: A Systematic Review of Laboratory Studies.

Eggmann F, Hwang J, Ayub J, Mante F Materials (Basel). 2023; 16(7).

PMID: 37048873 PMC: 10095157. DOI: 10.3390/ma16072580.

Incorporation of Nanomaterials in Glass Ionomer Cements-Recent Developments and Future Perspectives: A Narrative Review.

Fierascu R Nanomaterials (Basel). 2022; 12(21).

PMID: 36364603 PMC: 9658828. DOI: 10.3390/nano12213827.

References

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel R, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A . Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71(3):209-249. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660. View

Semrau R . The Role of Radiotherapy in the Definitive and Postoperative Treatment of Advanced Head and Neck Cancer. Oncol Res Treat. 2017; 40(6):347-352. DOI: 10.1159/000477128. View

Xiao C, Hanlon A, Zhang Q, Ang K, Rosenthal D, Nguyen-Tan P . Symptom clusters in patients with head and neck cancer receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Oral Oncol. 2012; 49(4):360-6. PMC: 3924732. DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2012.10.004. View

Sroussi H, Epstein J, Bensadoun R, Saunders D, Lalla R, Migliorati C . Common oral complications of head and neck cancer radiation therapy: mucositis, infections, saliva change, fibrosis, sensory dysfunctions, dental caries, periodontal disease, and osteoradionecrosis. Cancer Med. 2017; 6(12):2918-2931. PMC: 5727249. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.1221. View

Elad S, Zadik Y, Yarom N . Oral Complications of Nonsurgical Cancer Therapies. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2017; 25(2):133-147. DOI: 10.1016/j.cxom.2017.04.006. View

Aguiar G, Jham B, Magalhaes C, Sensi L, Freire A . A review of the biological and clinical aspects of radiation caries. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2009; 10(4):83-9. View

Miranda R, Silva A, Dantas N, Soares C, Novais V . Chemical analysis of in vivo-irradiated dentine of head and neck cancer patients by ATR-FTIR and Raman spectroscopy. Clin Oral Investig. 2018; 23(8):3351-3358. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2758-6. View

Madrid C, de Pauli Paglioni M, Line S, Vasconcelos K, Bianca Brandao T, Lopes M . Structural Analysis of Enamel in Teeth from Head-and-Neck Cancer Patients Who Underwent Radiotherapy. Caries Res. 2017; 51(2):119-128. DOI: 10.1159/000452866. View

Velo M, Farha A, Santos P, Shiota A, Sansavino S, Souza A . Radiotherapy alters the composition, structural and mechanical properties of root dentin in vitro. Clin Oral Investig. 2018; 22(8):2871-2878. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2373-6. View

10.

Gupta N, Pal M, Rawat S, Grewal M, Garg H, Chauhan D . Radiation-induced dental caries, prevention and treatment - A systematic review. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 6(2):160-6. PMC: 4922225. DOI: 10.4103/0975-5950.183870. View

11.

Hong C, Napenas J, Hodgson B, Stokman M, Mathers-Stauffer V, Elting L . A systematic review of dental disease in patients undergoing cancer therapy. Support Care Cancer. 2010; 18(8):1007-21. PMC: 2914291. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-010-0873-2. View

12.

Yamagata K, Onizawa K, Yanagawa T, Hasegawa Y, Kojima H, Nagasawa T . A prospective study to evaluate a new dental management protocol before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2006; 38(3):237-42. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bmt.1705429. View

13.

Hu J, Chen X, Li Y, Smales R, Yip K . Radiation-induced root surface caries restored with glass-ionomer cement placed in conventional and ART cavity preparations: results at two years. Aust Dent J. 2005; 50(3):186-90. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2005.tb00359.x. View

14.

Mickenautsch S, Mount G, Yengopal V . Therapeutic effect of glass-ionomers: an overview of evidence. Aust Dent J. 2011; 56(1):10-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01304.x. View

15.

Moberg M, Brewster J, Nicholson J, Roberts H . Physical property investigation of contemporary glass ionomer and resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig. 2018; 23(3):1295-1308. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2554-3. View

16.

Ferracane J . Resin composite--state of the art. Dent Mater. 2010; 27(1):29-38. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2010.10.020. View

17.

Ilie N, Hickel R . Resin composite restorative materials. Aust Dent J. 2011; 56 Suppl 1:59-66. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01296.x. View

18.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D . Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009; 6(7):e1000097. PMC: 2707599. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097. View

19.

Wood R, Maxymiw W, McComb D . 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. 1993; 18(3):94-102. View

20.

Hu J, Li Y, Smales R, Yip K . Restoration of teeth with more-viscous glass ionomer cements following radiation-induced caries. Int Dent J. 2003; 52(6):445-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1875-595x.2002.tb00640.x. View