Search result: Four clinical studies concerning restorations were found..
Clinical outcomes: The results indicate no difference in the success rate between both types of material if high-viscosity GIC was compared against Compomers.
State of evidence and recommendations: The quality of the existing evidence requires further assessment.
[‘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). Longevity of conventional GIC versus compomers in primary teeth [October 16, 2015]. Afribary. Retrieved from https://afribary.com/works/longevity-of-conventional-gic-versus-compomers-in-primary-teeth-october-16-2015
Mickenautsch, Steffen "Longevity of conventional GIC versus compomers in primary teeth [October 16, 2015]" Afribary. Afribary, 26 May. 2019, https://afribary.com/works/longevity-of-conventional-gic-versus-compomers-in-primary-teeth-october-16-2015. Accessed 23 Dec. 2024.
Mickenautsch, Steffen . "Longevity of conventional GIC versus compomers in primary teeth [October 16, 2015]". Afribary, Afribary, 26 May. 2019. Web. 23 Dec. 2024. < https://afribary.com/works/longevity-of-conventional-gic-versus-compomers-in-primary-teeth-october-16-2015 >.
Mickenautsch, Steffen . "Longevity of conventional GIC versus compomers in primary teeth [October 16, 2015]" Afribary (2019). Accessed December 23, 2024. https://afribary.com/works/longevity-of-conventional-gic-versus-compomers-in-primary-teeth-october-16-2015