Bioactive Resin Modified GIC vs. Conventional One in Vivo and in Vitro Study

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the bioactive resin modified GIC material (Activa) vs. conventionalone (Vitremer) clinically and laboratory.Materials & Methods: Clinically: Fifteen healthy children of both sexes aged (4-7) having abilateral similar initial occlusal caries on the lower 2nd primary molars were selected. A split-mouthdesign was used where conventional Class I cavities were prepared on carious molars. One sidewas restored with Activa and the contra-lateral side restored with Vitremer (control). The patientswere recalled for clinical evaluation at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperative. The modified UnitedStates Public Health Service (USPHS) evaluation criteria were used. Laboratory: included: 1.Mechanical strength tests (compressive and diametral tensile). 2. Shear bond strength test betweenboth restorative materials and dentin. Statistical analysis: Mann Whitney test was used for clinicalevaluation, while t-test and ANOVA were used for laboratory evaluation. The significance levelwas set at P ≤ 0.05.Results: Clinically: The overall clinical outcome showed no significant difference betweenboth groups in all evaluated criteria (p>0.05). Laboratory: Activa showed higher values than Vitremerin all tested groups and the differences were significant (p<0.05)Conclusion: Activa recorded better scores than Vitremer in nearly all tested clinical criteriabut without significant differences between them during recall-time intervals. But, the laboratorydifferences in all tested groups were significant.