Mechanical and optical properties of conventional restorative glass-ionomer cements - a systematic review

Abstract Objectives To perform a systematic review of test methodologies on conventional restorative glass-ionomer cement (GIC) materials for mechanical and optical properties to compare the results between different GICs. Material and Methods Screening of titles and abstracts, data extraction, and quality assessments of full-texts were conducted in search for in vitro studies on conventional GICs that follow the relevant specifications of ISO standards regarding the following mechanical and optical properties: compressive strength, flexural strength, color, opacity and radiopacity. Sources The Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences (LILACS), Brazilian Bibliography of Dentistry (BBO) databases from Latin-American and Caribbean System on Health Sciences Information (BIREME) and PubMed/Medline (US National Library of Medicine - National Institutes of Health) databases were searched regardless of language. Altogether, 1146 in vitro studies were selected. Two reviewers independently selected and assessed the articles according to pre-established inclusion/exclusion criteria. Among all the properties investigated, only one study was classified as being of fair quality that tested compressive strength and was included. It was observed that many authors had not strictly followed ISO recommendations and that, for some properties (diametral tensile strength and microhardness), there are no guidelines provided. Conclusions It was not possible to compare the results for the mechanical and optical properties of conventional restorative GICs due to the lack of standardization of studies.

摘要 研究目的：针对传统修复用玻璃离子水门汀（glass-ionomer cement, GIC）材料的力学与光学性能测试方法开展系统综述，旨在对比不同GIC材料的性能结果。
材料与方法：通过筛选文献标题与摘要、提取研究数据、对全文文献开展质量评价，检索符合ISO相关标准规范的传统GIC体外研究，所考察的性能包括抗压强度、抗弯强度、色泽、不透明度及阻射性。
文献来源：检索拉丁美洲与加勒比健康科学文献库（LILACS）、拉丁美洲加勒比健康科学信息系统（BIREME）下属的巴西牙科文献库（BBO），以及PubMed/Medline（美国国立医学图书馆，隶属于美国国立卫生研究院）数据库，检索不限语言。最终初筛得到1146篇体外研究文献，由2名研究者按照预先设定的纳入/排除标准独立完成文献筛选与质量评估。在所有被考察的性能中，仅1项检测抗压强度的研究被评为质量尚可并纳入本次综述。研究发现，多数作者未严格遵循ISO标准的相关建议，且针对径向拉伸强度、显微硬度这类性能，暂无对应的测试指南。
结论：由于现有研究缺乏标准化的实验方法，无法对传统修复用GIC的力学与光学性能结果进行有效对比分析。