Survival of glass ionomer restorations placed in primary molars using atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) and conventional cavity preparations: 2-year results. The 3.5-year survival rates of primary molars treated according to three treatment protocols: a controlled clinical trial One-year survival of occlusal ART restorations in primary molars placed with and without cavity conditioner. Amalgam and ART restorations in children: a controlled clinical trial ART and Conventional Root Restorations in Elders after 12 Months Clinical evaluation of the ART approach and materials in peri-urban farm schools of the Johannesburg area. Atraumatic Restorative Treatment with Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Material: Short-Term Results of a Pilot Study Clinical evaluation of multiple-surface ART restorations: 12 month follow-up. Effectiveness of Three Minimal Intervention Approaches for Managing Dental Caries: Survival of Restorations after 2 Years
OBJECTIVE To compare the survival of  glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) restorations placed in a dental clinic setting using both the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach with h and instruments , and conventional cavity preparation with rotary instruments . METHOD AND MATERIAL S Two encapsulated high-strength conventional GICs ( Fuji IX GP , Ketac-Molar Aplicap ) were placed in 82 Class I and 53 Class II preparations and one encapsulated non-gamma 2 amalgam alloy ( GK-amalgam ) was placed in 32 Class I preparations , in the primary molars of 60 Chinese children with a mean age of 7.40 + /- 1.24 ( SD ) years . Thus , 9 treatment groups were formed . RESULTS After two years , there were no significant survival differences found among 7 of the 9 treatment groups ( p = 0.99 ) . However , two groups comprising Fuji IX GP and Ketac-Molar Aplicap placed in Class II cavities prepared using the ART approach showed significantly lower restoration survivals ( p < 0.001 ) . Only 3 of the 72 initially sealed fissures adjacent to the restorations appeared to retain any GIC material . CONCLUSIONS In a clinic setting , both the ART h and instrument and conventional rotary instrument methods were equally suitable for high Class I restoration survival , but not for Class II restoration survival where the conventional cavity preparation method was preferable Objectives This study aim ed to test the hypothesis that there is no difference in the survival rates of molars treated according to the conventional restorative treatment ( CRT ) using amalgam , atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) using high-viscosity glass ionomer , and ultraconservative treatment ( UCT ) protocol after 3.5 years . Material s and methods Cavitated primary molars were treated according to CRT , ART , and UCT ( small cavities were restored with ART and medium/large cavities were daily cleaned with toothpaste/toothbrush under supervision ) . Molar extraction s result ing from toothache , sepsis , or pulp exposure were failures . The Kaplan – Meier method was used to estimate the survival curves . Results The numbers of treated teeth , among the 302 6–7-year-old children , were 341 ( CRT ) , 244 ( ART ) , and 281 ( for UCT group : 109 small ART , 166 open cavities , and 6 combinations ) . Protocol groups were similar at baseline regarding gender and mean decayed missing filled tooth score , but not regarding age and type of surface . The numbers of molars extracted were 22 ( CRT ) , 16 ( ART ) , and 26 ( UCT ) . Fistulae were most often recorded . After 3.5 years , the cumulative survival rate ± st and ard error for all molars treated was 90.9 ± 2.0 % with CRT , 90.4 ± 2.4 % with ART , and 88.6 ± 1.9 % with UCT ( p = 0.13 ) . Only a type of surface effect was observed over the 3.5-year period : survival rates for molars were higher for single- than for multiple-surface cavities . Conclusion There was no difference in the cumulative survival rates of primary molars treated according to the CRT , ART , and UCT protocol s over a 3.5-year period . Clinical relevance Keeping cavities in primary molars biofilm-free might be another treatment option alongside restoring such cavities through conventional and ART protocol PURPOSE The objectives of this clinical study were to : evaluate the survival of  occlusal atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) restorations  , on a longitudinal basis , in the primary molars of children in Mosul/Iraq ; and compare the success rate of ART restorations placed with and without cavity conditioning . METHODS One dentist placed 96 ART restorations in 48 6- to 7-year-olds who had bilateral matched pairs of carious primary molars . A split-mouth design was used to place restorations with and without cavity conditioning , which were assigned r and omly to contralateral sides . Restorations were evaluated after 6 and 12 months using the ART criteria . RESULTS The survival rate of ART restorations  placed with cavity conditioner was 89 % at the 6-month assessment and 74 % at the 12-month assessment . The success rates of ART restorations  placed without cavity conditioning in the 2 assessment s were 84 % and 67 % , respectively . There was no statistically significant difference between the ART restorations placed with and without cavity conditioner in both assessment s ( P>0.05 ) . The main cause of failure was the loss of restoration . CONCLUSIONS The 1-year success rate of occlusal ART restorations in primary molars was moderately successful . The ART technique 's cavity conditioning step was not proven to be better than not using it for Class I lesions Objectives The aims of this study were to compare 2-year cumulative survival rates of  amalgam and atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) restorations in primary molars and to investigate the determinants of the survival rate of restorations . Material s and methods A controlled clinical trial using a parallel group design was carried out on 258 children aged 6–7 years old , allocated to two treatment groups : conventional restorative treatment using amalgam and ART using high-viscosity glass ionomer . A total of 364 amalgam restorations and 386 ART restorations were placed by three pedodontists in 126 and 158 children , respectively , and were evaluated after 0.5 , 1 , and 2 years . Restorations were placed in vital primary molars with neither pain nor signs of pulp involvement . The survival analysis was conducted using the proportional hazard rate regression model with frailty correction . Results The 2-year cumulative survival rates for all amalgam ( 77.3 % ) and ART ( 73.5 % ) restorations were not statistically significantly different , but there was an effect of “ type of surface ” ( single/multiple ) and “ cavity filling time ” on the survival rates . Both amalgam and ART single-surface restorations had higher survival rates than multiple-surface restorations of the same material . Secondary caries was responsible for 36 and 38 % of failures in amalgam and ART restorations , respectively . Mean time for restoring all type of cavities with amalgam and ART restorations was 13.6 and 13.7 min , respectively . Conclusions Amalgam and ART restorations presented similar survival rates over a 2-year period for all , single-surface , and multiple-surface restorations . Clinical relevance In the cause of finding alternatives to amalgam , ART restorations using high-viscosity glass ionomer might be a suitable option for managing cavitated dentine carious lesions in vital primary molars Successful use of atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) in children has been reported , but little information is available regarding its use in older adults . The hypothesis of this study was that survival rates of root restorations placed by both ART and the conventional technique were similar . Root-surface caries lesions in 103 institutionalized elders in Hong Kong were treated r and omly by either : ( 1 ) the conventional approach — caries removed by dental burs , and the cavity filled with light-cured resin-modified glass ionomer ; or ( 2 ) the ART approach — caries removed by h and instruments , and the cavity filled with chemically cured high-strength glass ionomer . In total , 84 conventional and 78 ART restorations were placed . After 12 months , 63 conventional and 59 ART restorations were review ed , and the respective 12-month survival rates were 91.7 % and 87.0 % ( p > 0.05 ) . It is concluded that the survival rates of both types of root restorations were high and similar In this study , 1,325 school children from 7 farm schools were examined . Their mean age ( + /- SD ) was 10.5 + /- 3.0 ( range 6 - 11 ) years . At baseline , the mean DMFT score was 1.1 + /- 1.7 and 36.4 % of the children had caries . The prevalence of fluorosis among the children was 12.6 % . Curative treatment was offered to all the children . A total of 113 children ( 8.5 % ) with one-surface cavities on permanent teeth and without fluorosis were treated using the atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach . A total number of 163 cavities were included in the study , of which 82 were treated with Fuji IX glass-ionomer cement and 81 with Ketac-MOLAR ( h and mix ) . One year after treatment , restoration and sealant parts of ART fillings were examined . Caries status was also determined . The placing of the ART fillings and their evaluation were performed by different practitioners . A total number of 108 restorations  ( 58 with Fuji IX , 50 with Ketac-MOLAR ) were evaluated . Results of ART fillings showed a survival rate of 93.1 % with Fuji and 94.0 % with Ketac-MOLAR .  Retention of the sealant parts of ART fillings  was observed in 81 % of restorations with Fuji IX and 76 % with Ketac-MOLAR , not connected to the filled cavity . Caries was absent on all teeth restored with Fuji IX and noted in only one tooth restored with Ketac-MOLAR , not connected to the filled cavity . The retention rate after a 12-month period was acceptable and ART approach proved to be an appropriate technique for restoring teeth in this population group . There were no statistically significant differences between the survival rates of the two glass-ionomer restorative material s ( P > 0.05 ) Objectives : The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of the resin-modified glass ionomer ( RMGI ) material in atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) approach and compare RMGI with the high-strength traditional glass ionomer cement ( GIC ) in permanent teeth with one or more surface-carious cavities . Material s and Methods : This study was conducted in a village school in rural southeastern Anatolia , Turkey . The RMGI and GIC restorations with the ART technique were placed r and omly employing a split mouth design . In addition , the ART approach was used when necessary for both primary and /or permanent teeth with no pulpal involvement and no perceived pain before treatment . Ninety-one fillings were placed on contralateral molar pairs of 37 children . Baseline and 6-month evaluation of the fillings were made with the classic ART , modified Ryge and USPHS criteria . Results : Based on the ART criteria , 100 % of RMGI and 92.4 % of GIC restorations were classified as successful after 6 months , and the difference between the 2 groups was statistically significant ( p = 0.009 ) . While marginal discoloration was the commonest failure in the RMGI group according to both the modified Ryge and USPHS criteria , unsatisfactory surface texture and low anatomic form were the commonly seen failures in the ART technique . Conclusion : Generally , for each rating system , RMGI exhibited better clinical performance than GIC in all categories , except for marginal discoloration . Results based on the 6-month evaluation show that RMGI can be an alternative material to the GIC PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of multiple-surface restorations employing 2 different glass ionomer cements ( GICs ) and the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ( ART ) approach in permanent molar teeth . METHODS This study examined 60 restorations--36 Class I restorations involving 2 or more tooth surfaces and 24 Class II restorations -- that were placed in 46 schoolchildren ( 9 - 16 years of age ) by 2 dentists using the ART approach . The restorations were r and omly divided into 2 groups : ( a ) 30 cavities were filled with high strength GIC ( Ketac Molar-3 M ESPE ) , and ( b ) 30 cavities were filled with resin-modified GIC ( Fuji VIII-GC Corp ) . Two independent calibrated examiners carried out the evaluations according to ART criteria . The interexaminer kappa was 0.92 . Data were su bmi tted to chi-square , McNemar , and Fisher 's tests . A difference was statistically significant if P<.05 . RESULTS In a 12-month follow-up , 59 restorations were evaluated . The success rates of the restorations were 100 % and 93 % for Fuji VIII and Ketac Molar , respectively . There was no statistically significant difference between GICs , cavity types , or operators . CONCLUSIONS Based on a 12-month follow-up evaluation , the clinical performance of the multiple-surface atraumatic restorative treatment restorations of both glass ionomer cements ( high-strength and resin-modified ) was considered satisfactory with a high success rate The present study was aim ed at comparing the effectiveness of three minimally invasive restorative treatment approaches for dentinal lesions in occlusal surfaces . The approaches tested comprised a conventional and a modified – conventional treatment and a modified Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ( ART ) . The conventional approach was performed in a university dental clinic whilst the modified – conventional , employing portable equipment , and the modified ART , using h and instruments and a caries removal solution ( Caridex ® ) , were carried out in the field . Using the split – mouth design , 430 matched contralateral pairs of occlusal cavities were restored with amalgam or glass – ionomers in permanent molars of 152 school children by one dental therapist . The restorations were assessed using a modified USPHS – Ryge criteria . After 2 years , the cumulative survival percentages for occlusal amalgam and glass – ionomer restorations were 92 and 96 % , respectively . The survival of all restorations in the conventional , modified – conventional and the modified ART group was 96 , 96 and 91 % , respectively . The survival of occlusal amalgam and glass – ionomer restorations per treatment group was as follows : 94 and 99 % , respectively ( conventional group ) ; 95 and 97 % , respectively ( modified – conventional group ) , and 89 and 93 % , respectively ( modified ART group ) . The differences in survival percentage between restorations with amalgam and glass – ionomer , and between the three restorative treatment approaches were not statistically significant . In countries facing scarcity in re sources for dental care , ART seems a promising restorative approach to occlusal caries in posterior teeth . However , a longer clinical observation period is required to substantiate this initial conclusion
CONCLUSION ART restorations have similar survival rate compared to conventional treatment and can be considered an option to restore occlusoproximal cavities in primary molars
BACKGROUND A previous systematic review showed that atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) can be an option to restore the occlusoproximal cavities in primary teeth ; however , few studies fulfilled the criteria of inclusion to generate a high level of evidence .
AIM To up date the existing systematic review and address questions regarding survival rate of ART restorations compared to the conventional approach in occlusoproximal cavities in primary molars .