one year survival rate of ketac molar versus vitro molar for occlusoproximal art restorations: a rct

Clicks: 353
ID: 155654
2017
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #11 of 60 articles by views in journal of information and computational science

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Good survival rates for single-surface Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) restorations have been reported, while multi-surface ART restorations have not shown similar results. The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival rate of occluso-proximal ART restorations using two different filling materials: Ketac Molar EasyMix (3M ESPE) and Vitro Molar (DFL). A total of 117 primary molars with occluso-proximal caries lesions were selected in 4 to 8 years old children in Barueri city, Brazil. Only one tooth was selected per child. The subjetcs were randomly allocated in two groups according to the filling material. All treatments were performed following the ART premises and all restorations were evaluated after 2, 6 and 12 months. Restoration survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Log-rank test, while Cox regression analysis was used for testing association with clinical factors (α = 5%). There was no difference in survival rate between the materials tested, (HR = 1.60, CI = 0.98–2.62, p = 0.058). The overall survival rate of restorations was 42.74% and the survival rate per group was Ketac Molar = 50,8% and Vitro Molar G2 = 34.5%). Cox regression test showed no association between the analyzed clinical variables and the success of the restorations. After 12 months evaluation, no difference in the survival rate of ART occluso-proximal restorations was found between tested materials.
Reference Key
brito2017brazilianone Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;PACHECO Anna Luisa de Brito;OLEGÁRIO Isabel Cristina;BONIFÁCIO Clarissa Calil;CALVO Ana Flávia Bissoto;IMPARATO José Carlos Pettorossi;RAGGIO Daniela Prócida
Journal journal of information and computational science
Year 2017
DOI
10.1590/1807-3107bor-2017.vol31.0088
URL
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-83242017000100272&lng=en&tlng=en
Keywords
tooth glass ionomer cements

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.