Clinical comparison of Class V resin composite and glass ionomer restorations

Three techniques for restoring abrasion/erosion lesions were evaluated over a 2-year period: 1) glass ionomer restoration (Ketac-Fil); 2) composite restoration with a dentin bonding agent (Silux Plus, Scotchbond 2); 3) composite restoration with glass ionomer liner and a dentin bonding agent (Silux Plus, Vitrebond, Scotchbond 2). There were 116 lesions restored and 115 evaluated for color match, cavosurface discoloration, surface texture, caries development, and retention. Most restorations were rated clinically acceptable for color match, cavosurface discoloration, surface texture, and caries development when measured at 2 years. Glass ionomer restorations and composite restorations with a glass ionomer liner and a dentin bonding agent demonstrated better retention rates, 97.4% and 100% respectively, than the composite restorations with a dentin bonding agent only (86.8%) (Cochrane Q test, P = 0.07).