journal article·2026-02-13Open access

Evaluation of Clinical Performance of Alkasite Restorative Materials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Chloé Laporte, Rim Bourgi, Carlos Enrique Cuevas-Suárez, Naji Kharouf, Louis Hardan, Miguel Ángel Fernández-Barrera, Anh Tuan Dang, Youssef Haikel, Abigailt Flores-Ledesma

Abstract

Ion-releasing restorative biomaterials have gained increasing attention in minimally invasive dentistry due to their potential to combine mechanical reliability with therapeutic functionality. Cention® N is an alkasite-based restorative material designed to release fluoride, calcium, and hydroxyl ions while exhibiting mechanical properties comparable to resin-based composites. The present study aimed to systematically evaluate the clinical performance of this ion-releasing restorative material in comparison with conventional resin composites and glass ionomer cements. A comprehensive systematic search was conducted in PubMed (MEDLINE), Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, and SciELO databases up to 31 October 2024, following the PRISMA guidelines. Clinical studies assessing restorative performance outcomes were included. Meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager software (version 5.1). Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis, of which ten were eligible for quantitative analysis. The pooled results demonstrated comparable clinical performance between alkasite restoratives and resin-based composites regarding retention and secondary caries incidence, while superior outcomes were observed when compared with glass ionomer cements. Within the limitations of the available evidence, ion-releasing alkasite restorative materials represent a clinically acceptable alternative to conventional restorative options, combining functional biomaterial properties with reliable clinical performance. The conclusions should be interpreted within the context of the included studies, which exhibited clinical heterogeneity and, in several cases, a moderate risk of bias.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Dental Health and Care Utilization · Dental Erosion and Treatment

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Biomaterials and Bioengineering, INSERM UMR_S 1121, University of Strasbourg, 67000 Strasbourg, France

Department of Endodontics and Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Strasbourg, 67000 Strasbourg, France

Pôle de Médecine et Chirurgie Bucco-Dentaire, Hôpital Civil, Hôpitaux Universitaire de Strasbourg, 67000 Strasbourg, France

Department of Restorative and Esthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Saint-Joseph University of Beirut, Beirut 1107 2180, Lebanon

Dental Materials Laboratory, Academic Area of Dentistry, Autonomous University of Hidalgo State, San Agustín Tlaxiaca 42160, Mexico

Dental Materials and Biomaterials Laboratory, Faculty of Stomatology, Meritorious Autonomous University of Puebla, Puebla 72570, Mexico

Faculty of Dentistry, Haiphong University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Haiphong 180000, Vietnam

Department of Odonto-Stomatology, Haiphong Medical University Hospital, Haiphong 180000, Vietnam

References (58)

Show source-provided references
1. Valdivia, A.D.C.M., Sánchez, M.d.l.A.V., Cortés, D.E.A., and Cortés, E.G. (2023). Oral Health: Fundamentals, Importance, and Perspectives. Human Teeth-From Function to Esthetics, IntechOpen.10.5772/intechopen.111610 ↗
2. Global Prevalence of Edentulism and Dental Caries in Middle-Aged and Elderly Persons: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104335 ↗
3. Global Prevalence of Dental Caries in the Older People, 1991 to 2024: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis10.1007/s44445-025-00039-6 ↗
4. Banihashem Rad, S.A., Esteves-Oliveira, M., Maklennan, A., Douglas, G.V., Castiglia, P., and Campus, G. (2024). Oral Health Inequalities in Immigrant Populations Worldwide: A Scoping Review of Dental Caries and Periodontal Disease Prevalence. BMC Public Health, 24.10.1186/s12889-024-19354-4 ↗
5. The Evolving Landscape of Dental Restorative Material: A Mini Review
6. Dental Amalgam Phase-Down—Status, Alternatives, Strategies and Preparedness for Implementation: A Review10.1155/ijod/6688410 ↗
7. Will the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Follow the EU’s Mercury Dental Amalgam Ban? A Mini-Review
8. Singer, L., Fouda, A., and Bourauel, C. (2023). Biomimetic Approaches and Materials in Restorative and Regenerative Dentistry. BMC Oral Health, 23.10.1186/s12903-023-02808-3 ↗
9. Dental Resin Composites: A Review on Materials to Product Realizations10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109495 ↗
10. Developments in Resin-Based Composites10.1038/s41415-022-4240-8 ↗
11. Spagnuolo, G. (2022). Bioactive Dental Materials: The Current Status. Materials, 15.10.3390/ma15062016 ↗
12. Resin-Based Composites for Direct and Indirect Restorations: Clinical Applications, Recent Advances, and Future Trends
13. Ranking Analysis of Tribological, Mechanical, and Thermal Properties of Nano Hydroxyapatite Filled Dental Restorative Composite Materials Using the R-Method10.1002/pat.70010 ↗
14. Updates on the Clinical Application of Glass Ionomer Cement in Restorative and Preventive Dentistry10.1016/j.jds.2024.07.021 ↗
15. Panetta, A., Lopes, P., Novaes, T.F., Rio, R., Fernandes, G.V.O., and Mello-Moura, A.C.V. (2024). Evaluating Glass Ionomer Cement Longevity in the Primary and Permanent Teeth—An Umbrella Review. J. Funct. Biomater., 15.10.3390/jfb15020048 ↗
16. A Bibliometric Analysis of Minimally Invasive Dentistry: A Review of the Literature from 1994 to 202110.1016/j.prosdent.2021.09.023 ↗
17. A Narrative Review of Minimally Invasive Techniques in Restorative Dentistry10.1016/j.sdentj.2023.11.005 ↗
18. Smart Materials Leading to Restorative Dentistry: An Overview
19. Abozaid, D., Azab, A., Bahnsawy, M.A., Eldebawy, M., Ayad, A., Soomro, R., Elwakeel, E., and Mohamed, M.A. (2025). Bioactive Restorative Materials in Dentistry: A Comprehensive Review of Mechanisms, Clinical Applications, and Future Directions. Odontology, 1–29.10.1007/s10266-025-01162-w ↗
20. Marovic, D., Par, M., Posavec, K., Marić, I., Štajdohar, D., Muradbegović, A., Tauböck, T.T., Attin, T., and Tarle, Z. (2022). Long-Term Assessment of Contemporary Ion-Releasing Restorative Dental Materials. Materials, 15.10.3390/ma15124042 ↗
21. Is Cention-N Comparable to Other Direct Dental Restorative Materials? A Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies10.1016/j.dental.2024.06.014 ↗
22. Cention-N: A Comprehensive Review
23. An Update on Cention N: An Aesthetic Direct Bulk-Fill Restorative Material
24. The impact of CENTION-N compared to glass-ionomer cement on shear bond strength and micro-leakage of primary teeth restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1007/s44445-025-00049-4 ↗
25. In vitro evaluation of mechanical properties of Cention N and its comparison with resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) restorative material as used in primary teeth10.1155/2024/9420336 ↗
26. Comparison of Antibacterial Activity and Fluoride Release in Tooth-Colored Restorative Materials: Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer, Zirconomer, Giomer, and Cention N10.4103/1735-3327.363534 ↗
27. Cention N Compared to Other Contemporary Tooth-Colored Restorative Materials in Terms of Fluoride Ion Releasing Efficacy: Validation of a Novel Caries-Prevention-Initiative by the Ministry of Health, Malaysia10.13005/bpj/2406 ↗
28. An Alkasite Restorative Material Effectively Remineralized Artificial Interproximal Enamel Caries In Vitro10.1007/s00784-022-04407-y ↗
29. In Vivo Evaluation of Clinical Performance of Cention N and Glass Ionomer Cement in Proximal Restorations of Primary Molars10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_108_21 ↗
30. Comparative Evaluation of Postoperative Sensitivity in Bulk Fill Restoratives: A Randomized Controlled Trial10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_218_18 ↗
31. Alkasite Restorative Material for Endodontically Treated Teeth: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study10.5395/rde.2024.49.e24 ↗
32. Clinical Performance of an Alkasite-Based Bioactive Restorative in Class II Cavities: A Randomized Clinical Trial10.1590/1678-7757-2023-0025 ↗
33. Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Different Glass Ionomer Restorative Materials in Primary Molars: A Comparative Randomized Clinical Trial
34. The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews10.1136/bmj.n71 ↗
35. Rayyan—A Web and Mobile App for Systematic Reviews10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 ↗
36. RoB 2: A Revised Tool for Assessing Risk of Bias in Randomised Trials10.1136/bmj.l4898 ↗
37. Evaluation of New Alkasite Based Restorative Material for Restoring Non-Carious Cervical Lesions-Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
38. Clinical Performance of Two Ion-releasing Bulk-fill Composites in Class I and Class II Restorations: A Two-year Evaluation10.1111/jerd.13193 ↗
39. Periodontal Evaluation for a New Alkasite Restorative Material in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A Randomized-controlled Clinical Trial10.1002/cre2.70025 ↗
40. Clinical Effectiveness of Alkasite versus Nanofilled Resin Composite in the Restoration of Occlusal Carious Lesions in Permanent Molar Teeth of Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial10.1007/s40368-023-00788-0 ↗
41. Kaur, K., Suneja, B., Jodhka, S., Saini, R.S., Chaturvedi, S., Bavabeedu, S.S., Alhamoudi, F.H., Cicciù, M., and Minervini, G. (2023). Comparison between Restorative Materials for Pulpotomised Deciduous Molars: A Randomized Clinical Study. Children, 10.10.3390/children10020284 ↗
42. Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Performance of Three Different Glass Hybrid Restorations in High Caries Risk Patients: A Randomized Control Trial10.3889/oamjms.2022.10354 ↗
43. New Dual-Cure Resin-Based Material in Occlusal and Occluso-Proximal Restorations of Primary Teeth: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2173 ↗
44. Derchi, G., Marchio, V., Giuca, M.R., and Lardani, L. (2022). Clinical Performance of CentionTM Alkasite Restorative Material vs. Glass Ionomer Cement Used in Deciduous Teeth: One-Year Evaluation. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app122110845 ↗
45. An In Vivo Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Posterior High Strength Glass Ionomer Cement and Glass Hybrid Bulk-Fill Alkasite Restorative Material as Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition: A Comparative Study
46. Comparative Evaluation of Postoperative Sensitivity Following Restoration of Class I Lesions with Different Restorative Materials: An In Vivo Study10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3085 ↗
47. Wear of an Ion-Releasing Powder/Liquid Polymer Resin in Relation to That of Glass-Ionomer and Conventional Resin Composites
48. Comparative Evaluation of Mechanical and Microleakage Properties of Cention-N, Composite, and Glass Ionomer Cement Restorative Materials10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2837 ↗
49. Biodegradation and Abrasive Wear of Nano Restorative Materials10.2341/10-221-L ↗
50. Nanofilled Resin Composite Properties and Clinical Performance: A Review10.2341/17-208-T ↗
51. Evaluation and Comparison of Physical Properties of Cention n with Other Restorative Materials in Artificial Saliva: An In Vitro Study10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2383 ↗
52. Resin Composite Cements: Current Status and a Novel Classification Proposal10.1111/jerd.13036 ↗
53. Dental Composite Resin: A Review of Major Mechanical Properties, Measurements and Its Influencing Factors10.1002/mawe.202100326 ↗
54. Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Three Different Direct Restorative Materials (Silver Amalgam, Glass Ionomer Cement, Cention N), in Class II Restorations Using Stereomicroscope: An In Vitro Study10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_481_17 ↗
55. Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage around Class V Cavities Restored with Alkasite Restorative Material with and without Bonding Agent and Flowable Composite Resin: An In Vitro Study10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_767_17 ↗
56. Comparison of Fluoride Ion Release and Alkalizing Potential of a New Bulk-Fill Alkasite10.4103/JCD.JCD_74_19 ↗
57. Wiriyasatiankun, P., Sakoolnamarka, R., and Thanyasrisung, P. (2022). The Impact of an Alkasite Restorative Material on the pH of Streptococcus mutans Biofilm and Dentin Remineralization: An in Vitro Study. BMC Oral Health, 22.10.1186/s12903-022-02354-4 ↗
58. Fluoride Exchange by Glass-Ionomer Dental Cements and Its Clinical Effects: A Review