Frencken JE. The state-of-the-art of ART sealants. Dent Update. 2014; 41:119-124
Frencken JE, van Amerongen WE. The atraumatic restorative treatment approach. In: Fejerskov O, Kidd E (eds). Oxford: Blackwell Munksgaard Ltd; 2008
Frencken JE, Peters MC, Manton DJ, Leal SC, Gordan VV, Eden E. Minimal Intervention Dentistry (MID) for managing dental caries – a review. Int Dent J. 2012; 62:223-243
Schmaltz G. ART – a method on its way into dentistry. Clin Oral Invest. 2012; 16:1335-1336
Leal SC, De Menezes Abreu DM, Frencken JE. Dental anxiety and pain related to Atraumatic Restorative Treatment. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009; 17:84-88
Frencken JE, Leal SC, Navarro MFL. 25 years atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach: a comprehensive overview. Clin Oral Invest. 2012; 16:1337-1346
Estupiñán-Day S, Tellez M, Kaur S, Milner T, Solari A. Managing dental caries with atraumatic restorative treatment in children: successful experience in three Latin American countries. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2013; 33:237-243
Davies GN. Early childhood caries – a synopsis. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1998; 26:106-116
Kateeb ET, Warren JJ, Damiano P, Momany E, Kanellis M, Weber-Gasparoni K, Ansley T. Teaching atraumatic restorative treatment in US dental schools: a survey of predoctoral pediatric dentistry program directors. J Dent Educ. 2013; 77:1306-1314
da Mata C, Allen PF, Cronin M, O'Mahony D, McKenna G, Woods N. Cost-effectiveness of ART restorations in elderly adults: a randomized clinical trial. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2013; https://doi.org/10.1111/cdoe.12066
Molina GF, Leal SC, Frencken JE. Strategies for managing carious lesions in patients with disabilities – a systematic review. J Disabil Oral Health. 2011; 12:159-167
Holmgren CJ, Figueredo MC. Two decades of ART: improving on success through further research. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009; 17:122-134
Modena KC, Casas-Apayco LC, Atta MT, Costa CA, Hebling J, Sipert CR, Navarro MF, Santos CF. Cytotoxicity and biocompatibility of direct and indirect pulp capping materials. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009; 17:544-554
Mickenautsch S. How well are GIC product labels related to current systematic review evidence?. Dent Update. 2011; 38:634-644
De Amorim RG, Leal SC, Frencken JE. Survival of ART Sealants and ART restorations: a meta-analysis. Clin Oral Invest. 2012; 16:429-441
Van't Hof MA, Frencken JE, van Palenstein Helderman WH, Holmgren CJ. The atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach for managing dental caries: a meta-analysis. Int Dent J. 2006; 56:345-351
Farag A, van der Sanden WJ, Abdelwahab H, Frencken JE. Survival of ART restorations assessed using selected FDI and modified ART restoration criteria. Clin Oral Invest. 2011; 15:409-415
Lo ECM, Holmgren CJ, Hu D, Wan H, van Palenstein Helderman W. Six-year follow-up of atraumatic restorative treatment restorations placed in Chinese school children. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2007; 35:387-392
Zanata RL, Fagundes TC, Freitas MC, Lauris JR, Navarro MF. Ten-year survival of ART restorations in permanent posterior teeth. Clin Oral Invest. 2011; 15:265-271
Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V, Banerjee A. Atraumatic restorative treatment versus amalgam restoration longevity: a systematic review. Clin Oral Invest. 2010; 14:233-240
Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V. Failure rate of atraumatic restorative treatment using high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement compared to that of conventional amalgam restorative treatment in primary and permanent teeth: a systematic review update. J Minim Interv Dent. 2012; 5:63-124
Raggio DP, Hesse D, Lenzi TL, AB Guglielmi C, Braga MM. Is atraumatic restorative treatment an option for restoring occlusoproximal caries lesions in primary teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2012; https://doi.org/10.1111/23
de Amorim RG, Leal SC, Mulder J, Creugers NHJ, Frencken JE. Amalgam and ART restorations in children: a controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Invest. 2014; 18:(1)117-124
Frencken JE, van't Hof MA, van Amerongen WE, Holmgren CJ. Effectiveness of single-surface ART restorations in the permanent dentition: a meta-analysis. J Dent Res. 2004; 83:120-123
Taifour D, Frencken JE, Beiruti N, Van't Hof MA, Truin GJ. Effectiveness of glass-ionomer (ART) and amalgam restorations in the deciduous dentition – results after 3 years. Caries Res. 2002; 36:437-444
Farag A, van der Sanden WJM, Abdelwahab H, Mulder J, Frencken JE. 5-Year survival of ART restorations with and without cavity disinfection. J Dent. 2009; 37:468-474
Mickenautsch S, Yengopal V. Absence of carious lesions at margins of glass-ionomer cement and amalgam restorations: an update of systematic review evidence. BMC Res Notes. 2011; 11:(4)
ART is less anxiety-and pain-provoking than traditional restorative treatments; administration of local anaesthesia is rarely required. Systematic reviews have provided evidence of the high level of effectiveness of high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restoration in restoring single-surface cavities, both in primary and permanent posterior teeth, but its survival rates in restoring multiple-surface cavities in primary posterior teeth needs to be improved. Insufficient information is available regarding the survival rates of multiple-surface ART restorations in permanent teeth. Evidence from these reviews indicates no difference in the survival rates of single-surface high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations and amalgam restorations in primary and permanent posterior teeth.
Clinical Relevance: Where indicated, high-viscosity glass-ionomer ART restorations can be used alongside traditional restorations. ART provides a much more acceptable introduction to dental restorative care than the traditional ‘injection, drill and fill’.
Article
This article is the second one about the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) approach and covers the effectiveness of ART restorations. The first described the effectiveness of ART sealants.1 An ART restoration involves removal of the decomposed carious tooth tissues with a sharp metal excavator. This procedure is relatively easily performed in medium-sized and large cavities. In small cavities, hand instruments, like the enamel access cutter and the chisel, are used to widen the cavity opening further to facilitate entrance to it with the excavator. The cleaned cavity is then restored with an adhesive dental material, mostly a high-viscosity glass-ionomer, which simultaneously seals any remaining pits and fissures that remain at risk.2 In other words, the use of the drill removes too much healthy and/or remineralizable The protocol for application of an ART restoration is presented in Table 1 and illustrated in Figure 1.
Register now to continue reading
Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:
