Objective To compare the effects of ffowable resin and glass ionomer cement in the repair of wedge-shaped defect. Methods A total of 78 patients with wedge-shaped defect admitted to our hospital from January 2022 to December 2024 were selected, and they were divided into the control group (n=39) and the observation group (n=39) according to different repair materials. The control group was given glass ionomer cement repair, and the observation group was given ffowable resin repair. The repair effect and success rate, microleakage degree, gingival crevicular ffuid inffammatory factor indexes, aesthetic effect and complications were compared between the two groups. Results There was no statistically signiffcant difference in the repair effect and success rate between the two groups (P>0.05). The microleakage qualiffcation rate of the observation group (76.92%) was higher than that of the control group (53.85%) (P<0.05). The levels of interleukin-1β, interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α in the observation group after treatment were lower than those in the control group (P<0.05). There was no statistically signiffcant difference in the pink esthetic score between the two groups after treatment (P>0.05). The white esthetic score of the observation group after treatment was higher than that of the control group (P<0.05). There was no statistically signiffcant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Flowable resin and glass ionomer cement have similar effects and complication risks in the repair of wedge-shaped defect, but flowable resin has lower microleakage risk, milder inffammatory response and better aesthetic effect.