SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Dent. Med.
Sec. Pediatric Dentistry
Clinical Effectiveness of Ion-Releasing Restorations Compared to Composite Restorations in Pediatric Dental Treatments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Provisionally accepted
Heber Isac Arbildo Vega1
Fredy Hugo Cruzado-Oliva2
Hernán Vásquez-Rodrigo3
Franz Tito Coronel Zubiate4*Luis Felipe Alarco-La Rosa2Luisfelipe Carlos Alarco-Jurado5Stefanny Lisset Zarate-Chavarry5- 1Faculty of Dentistry, Dentistry School. Faculty of Human Medicine, Human Medicine School, Universidad San Martín de Porres, Chiclayo, Peru
- 2Faculty of Stomatology, Stomatology School, Universidad Nacional de Trujillo, Trujillo, Peru
- 3Faculty of Dentistry, Dentistry School., Universidad San Martín de Porres, Chiclayo, Peru
- 4Faculty of Health Sciences, Stomatology School, Universidad Nacional Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza de Amazonas, Chachapoyas, Peru
- 5Faculty of Human Medicine, Stomatology School, Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego, Trujillo, Peru
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: The choice of restorative material in pediatric dentistry is clinically relevant for ensuring long-term tooth preservation and reducing recurrent caries. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the clinical effectiveness of ion-releasing restorations (IRR) and composite resin (CR) in children’s dental treatments. Methods: Randomized clinical trials with ≥1-year follow-up were identified through comprehensive searches in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scielo, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar up to January 2024. Studies reporting clinical outcomes of IRR versus CR were analyzed. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB2.0, and evidence certainty with GRADE. Results: Of 1109 records screened, nine trials were included. Pooled analyzes showed no statistically significant differences between IRR and CR regarding secondary caries, marginal adaptation, or restoration survival (p>0.05). Both materials demonstrated satisfactory longevity and clinical behavior. Conclusions: Within the limitations of available evidence, ion-releasing and composite restorations provide comparable clinical performance in pediatric dentistry. The findings support the use of IRR as a reliable alternative for child patients, offering bioactive benefits while maintaining similar restorative success to composites.
Keywords: Ion-releasing restoration, composite resin, Glass ionomer cement, Children, review, Meta-analysis
Received: 22 Jun 2025; Accepted: 11 Nov 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Arbildo Vega, Cruzado-Oliva, Vásquez-Rodrigo, Coronel Zubiate, Alarco-La Rosa, Alarco-Jurado and Zarate-Chavarry. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Franz Tito Coronel Zubiate, franz.coronel@untrm.edu.pe
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.