Background: There are no published studies comparing the clinical performances of more-viscous glass-ionomer cement (GIC) restorations when placed using conventional and atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) cavity preparation methods to restore root surface caries.
Methods: One dentist used encapsulated Fuji IX GP and Ketac-Molar to restore 72 conventional and 74 ART cavity preparations for 15 patients who had received cervicofacial radiation therapy. Two assessors evaluated the restorations at six, 12, and 24 months for retention, marginal defects and surface wear, and recurrent caries.
Results: After two years, the cumulative restoration successes were 65.2 per cent for the conventional and 66.2 per cent for the ART cavity preparations, without statistical or clinical significance (P > 0.50). Restoration dislodgement accounted for 82.8 per cent and marginal defects for 17.2 per cent of all failures. There were no instances of unsatisfactory restoration wear or recurrent caries observed. Teeth with three or more restored cervical surfaces accounted for 79.3 per cent of all failures (P < 0.0001).
Conclusions: For root surface caries restored with GIC, the use of hand instruments only with the ART method was an equally effective alternative to conventional rotary instrumentation for cavity preparation. Larger restorations had higher failures, usually from dislodgement.