Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 Mar-Apr;20(2):192-9.
doi: 10.1590/s1678-77572012000200012.

Two-year clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Two-year clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions

Evrim Eliguzeloglu Dalkilic et al. J Appl Oral Sci. 2012 Mar-Apr.

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. 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
    1. 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
    1. Brunton PA. Decision-making in operative dentistry. London: Quintessence Publishing Co. Ltd; 2002.
    1. 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
    1. Duarte S, Jr., Perdigao J, Lopes MM. Effect of dentin conditioning time on nanoleakage. Oper Dent. 2006;31(4):500–511. - PubMed

MeSH terms