Two-year clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions
- PMID: 22666836
- PMCID: PMC3894762
- DOI: 10.1590/s1678-77572012000200012
Two-year clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions
Abstract
Objectives: Adhesive systems are continuously being introduced to Dentistry, unfortunately often without sufficient clinical validation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of cervical restorations done with three different adhesive systems.
Material and methods: 158 non-carious cervical lesions of 23 patients were restored with a nanofilled composite resin (Filtek Supreme, 3M/ESPE) combined with Single Bond (3M/ESPE, group SI), Clearfil SE (Kuraray Medical Inc., group CL) and Xeno III (De Trey Dentsply, group XE). In groups SI-B, CL-B and XE-B, the outer surface of the sclerotic dentin was removed by roughening with a diamond bur before application of the respective adhesive systems. In groups CL-BP and XE-BP, after removal of the outer surface of the sclerotic dentin with the bur, the remaining dentin was etched with 37% phosphoric acid and the self-etch adhesive systems Clearfil SE and Xeno III were applied, respectively. Lesions were evaluated at baseline, and restorations after 3 months, 1 year and 2 years using modified USPHS criteria.
Results: After 2 years, no significant difference was found between the retention rates of the groups (p >0.05). Although groups CL and SI showed significantly better marginal adaptation than group XE (p<0.05) at 2 years, no significant difference was found between the marginal adaptation of the groups SI-B, CL-B and XE-B (p>0.05). After 2 years no significant difference was observed among the marginal staining results of all groups (p>0.05).
Conclusion: Although all adhesive systems showed similar retention rates, Clearfil SE and Single Bond showed better marginal adaptation than Xeno III after 2 years of follow-up.
Similar articles
-
Effect of surface treatments and different adhesives on the hybrid layer thickness of non-carious cervical lesions.Oper Dent. 2008 May-Jun;33(3):338-45. doi: 10.2341/07-96. Oper Dent. 2008. PMID: 18505226 Clinical Trial.
-
Clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems in class V non-carious lesions.Dent Mater. 2000 Jul;16(4):285-91. doi: 10.1016/s0109-5641(00)00019-1. Dent Mater. 2000. PMID: 10831784
-
2-year Clinical evaluation of sodium hypochlorite treatment in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: a pilot study.Oper Dent. 2006 Sep-Oct;31(5):530-5. doi: 10.2341/05-119. Oper Dent. 2006. PMID: 17024939 Clinical Trial.
-
Two-year clinical performance of Clearfil SE and Clearfil S3 in restoration of unabraded non-carious class V lesions.Oper Dent. 2010 May-Jun;35(3):273-8. doi: 10.2341/09-266-C. Oper Dent. 2010. PMID: 20533626
-
Effect of dentin roughness on the adhesive performance in non-carious cervical lesions: A double-blind randomized clinical trial.J Dent. 2018 Feb;69:60-69. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.09.011. Epub 2017 Sep 27. J Dent. 2018. PMID: 28962842 Clinical Trial.
Cited by
-
Marginal adaptation of class V composite restorations submitted to thermal and mechanical cycling.J Appl Oral Sci. 2013 Jan-Feb;21(1):68-73. doi: 10.1590/1678-7757201302295. J Appl Oral Sci. 2013. PMID: 23559115 Free PMC article.
-
A comparative study of the microtensile bond strength and microstructural differences between sclerotic and Normal dentine after surface pretreatment.BMC Oral Health. 2019 Oct 7;19(1):216. doi: 10.1186/s12903-019-0899-x. BMC Oral Health. 2019. PMID: 31590650 Free PMC article.
-
One year comparative clinical evaluation of EQUIA with resin-modified glass ionomer and a nanohybrid composite in noncarious cervical lesions.J Conserv Dent. 2015 Nov-Dec;18(6):449-52. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.168805. J Conserv Dent. 2015. PMID: 26752837 Free PMC article.
-
Impact of Dentinal Tubule Orientation on Dentin Bond Strength.Curr Med Sci. 2018 Aug;38(4):721-726. doi: 10.1007/s11596-018-1936-8. Epub 2018 Aug 20. Curr Med Sci. 2018. PMID: 30128884
-
Clinical evaluation of composite restorations in Er:YAG laser-prepared cavities re-wetting with chlorhexidine.Clin Oral Investig. 2017 May;21(4):1231-1241. doi: 10.1007/s00784-016-1897-x. Epub 2016 Jul 4. Clin Oral Investig. 2017. PMID: 27376544
References
-
- Bayne SC, Heymann HO, Sturdevant JR, Wilder AD, Sluder TB. Contributing co-variables in clinical trials. Am J Dent. 1991;4(5):247–250. - PubMed
-
- Browning WD, Brackett WW, Gilpatrick RO. Two-year clinical comparison of a microfilled and a hybrid resin-based composite in noncarious Class V lesions. Oper Dent. 2000;25(1):46–50. - PubMed
-
- Brunton PA. Decision-making in operative dentistry. London: Quintessence Publishing Co. Ltd; 2002.
-
- Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions. Oper Dent. 2007;32(1):11–15. - PubMed
-
- Duarte S, Jr., Perdigao J, Lopes MM. Effect of dentin conditioning time on nanoleakage. Oper Dent. 2006;31(4):500–511. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical