Search result: Seven clinical studies to topics concerning orthodontic bonding, root- and tooth restorations were found.
Clinical outcomes: The results indicate a higher cariostatic effect of GIC for orthodontic bonding and tooth restorations in permanent teeth. No difference was found for tooth restorations in primary teeth when compared to fluoride containing composite and root restorations.
[‘Preliminary Systematic Literature Searches’ are based on SYSTEM’s periodic systematic searches of the dental literature and provide first overviews over existing clinical evidence but are limited in the number of databases searched, as well as the assessment of precision and internal validity of results and thus do not replace the need for a full systematic review report to the topic]
Mickenautsch, S. (2019). Cariostatic effect of conventional GIC versus composite resin [October 11, 2016]. Afribary. Retrieved from https://afribary.com/works/cariostatic-effect-of-conventional-gic-versus-composite-resin-october-11-2016
Mickenautsch, Steffen "Cariostatic effect of conventional GIC versus composite resin [October 11, 2016]" Afribary. Afribary, 27 May. 2019, https://afribary.com/works/cariostatic-effect-of-conventional-gic-versus-composite-resin-october-11-2016. Accessed 26 Apr. 2024.
Mickenautsch, Steffen . "Cariostatic effect of conventional GIC versus composite resin [October 11, 2016]". Afribary, Afribary, 27 May. 2019. Web. 26 Apr. 2024. < https://afribary.com/works/cariostatic-effect-of-conventional-gic-versus-composite-resin-october-11-2016 >.
Mickenautsch, Steffen . "Cariostatic effect of conventional GIC versus composite resin [October 11, 2016]" Afribary (2019). Accessed April 26, 2024. https://afribary.com/works/cariostatic-effect-of-conventional-gic-versus-composite-resin-october-11-2016