International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026
Clinical Assessment of a Newer Resin-based Bioactive Restorative Cement on Class II Cavities of Primary Molars: A Comparative Analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
K Mohammed Bilal Sheriff, Jagadeesan Aarthi, Elangovan Arun, Chenchugopal Madhan, Venkataraman Dharini, Arumugam Packialakshmi
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Primary molars play a significant role in mastication, jaw alignment, and guiding permanent tooth eruption. However, their proximal surfaces are prone to decay due to anatomical challenges and cleansing difficulties, making restorative intervention challenges. While traditional materials such as dental amalgam, composite resin (CR), and glass ionomer cement (GIC) are commonly used, advancements in dental technology have introduced bioactive materials as promising alternatives, warranting further research to ensure optimal outcomes.
AIM: The present study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical performance of a newer resin-based bioactive restorative cement on class II cavities of primary molars over a 12-month period.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 258 class II restorations in primary molars of children aged 4-9 years were evaluated over 12 months. Three restorative materials-ACTIVA™ KIDS BioACTIVE™, Tetric N-Flow Bulk Fill Composite, and GC Gold Label 2-were assessed using modified USPHS criteria. The obtained values evaluated using the statistical software SPSS 21.0 revealed a p-value of ≤0.05, which was statistically significant.
RESULTS: The frequency distribution of variables shows score A for all criteria except for color match at baseline and at 12 months, with no significant differences in outcomes within groups over time. However, group I demonstrated a significantly better color match compared to groups II [p = 0.04, relative risk (RR) 0.69] and III (RR 0.71), and had fewer teeth (2.3%) with score C for marginal discoloration.
CONCLUSION: ACTIVA™ KIDS BioACTIVE-RESTORATIVE™ demonstrated a significant difference in color match at 12 months compared to other groups, while no significant differences were observed among the three materials for other evaluated parameters.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Moving forward toward biomimetic materials, ACTIVA™ KIDS BioACTIVE-RESTORATIVE™ is a promising material, with properties superior to that of composites and conventional GICs. Due to its remineralizing property and capability to accomplish bulk-fill restorations, it could be a great boon to pediatric dentists while performing class II restorations in primary molars.
HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Mohammed Bilal Sheriff K, Aarthi J, Elangovan A, et al. Clinical Assessment of a Newer Resin-based Bioactive Restorative Cement on Class II Cavities of Primary Molars: A Comparative Analysis. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2026;19(2):210-214.
AIM: The present study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical performance of a newer resin-based bioactive restorative cement on class II cavities of primary molars over a 12-month period.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 258 class II restorations in primary molars of children aged 4-9 years were evaluated over 12 months. Three restorative materials-ACTIVA™ KIDS BioACTIVE™, Tetric N-Flow Bulk Fill Composite, and GC Gold Label 2-were assessed using modified USPHS criteria. The obtained values evaluated using the statistical software SPSS 21.0 revealed a p-value of ≤0.05, which was statistically significant.
RESULTS: The frequency distribution of variables shows score A for all criteria except for color match at baseline and at 12 months, with no significant differences in outcomes within groups over time. However, group I demonstrated a significantly better color match compared to groups II [p = 0.04, relative risk (RR) 0.69] and III (RR 0.71), and had fewer teeth (2.3%) with score C for marginal discoloration.
CONCLUSION: ACTIVA™ KIDS BioACTIVE-RESTORATIVE™ demonstrated a significant difference in color match at 12 months compared to other groups, while no significant differences were observed among the three materials for other evaluated parameters.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Moving forward toward biomimetic materials, ACTIVA™ KIDS BioACTIVE-RESTORATIVE™ is a promising material, with properties superior to that of composites and conventional GICs. Due to its remineralizing property and capability to accomplish bulk-fill restorations, it could be a great boon to pediatric dentists while performing class II restorations in primary molars.
HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Mohammed Bilal Sheriff K, Aarthi J, Elangovan A, et al. Clinical Assessment of a Newer Resin-based Bioactive Restorative Cement on Class II Cavities of Primary Molars: A Comparative Analysis. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2026;19(2):210-214.