Dalia D. Fayed, Hatem S. Amin And Ahmed I. El Dosoky .,

ABSTRACT


Introduction: Incorporation Of Antibacterials Into Restorative Materials, Has Evolved, Due To The Increased Understanding Of The Caries Process. However, The Impact Of This Mixture On The Properties Of These Materials Must Be Investigated. Up Till Now, There Are No In-vivo Studies Comparing The Survival Rate Between Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement [GIC] And Chlorhexidine Diacetate-modified GIC.

Purpose: Compare The Clinical Effectiveness Of Conventional Versus Chlorhexidine -containing Glass Ionomer Cement Using The Atraumatic Restorative Treatment Approach In Primary Molars. Methods: Forty-five Primary Molars, In 5-8-year-olds, With Single Surface Occlusal Caries Were Randomly Divided Into Three Groups. Group I: The Carious Primary Molar Was Restored With Atraumatic Restorative Treatment [ART] Approach Using Conventional GIC. Groups II And III: The Carious Primary Molar Was Restored With ART Approach Using Experimental GIC Containing Chlorhexidine Diacetate [CHX] 1% And 2%, Respectively (w/w). Clinical Performance For All Groups Was Assessed At 3, 6, And 12 Months. Results Were Statistically Analyzed Using Chi-square Tests.

Results: Results Showed No Significant Difference In The Survival Rate, Between All Groups, At The Different Time Periods. Conclusion: The Addition Of 1 And 2% CHX To GIC Did Not Compromise The Clinical Effectiveness Of GIC Used In The ART Approach.