This study evaluated the long-term clinical performance of porcelain laminate veneers luted with hybrid composite in combination with total-etch and self-etch adhesive systems. The study was performed on 30 patients ranging in age between 28 and 54 years. Ten veneers were performed per patient in the maxillary arch. In Group 1, 150 teeth were treated with porcelain veneers, using a total-etch adhesive system (Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus, 3M ESPE). In Group 2, 150 teeth were bonded with a self-etch adhesive system (AdheSE, Ivoclar-Vivadent). All the veneers were luted with a light-cured hybrid composite (Z100, 3M ESPE). The patients were recalled after 1, 2 and 5 years. Modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria were utilized to evaluate the porcelain laminate veneers in terms of marginal adaptation, cavo-surface marginal discoloration, secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity, satisfaction with restoration shade and gingival tissue response. Data were analyzed using the Chi-Square test (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the total-etch and self-etch groups in terms of USPHS criteria (p > 0.05). Porcelain veneers exhibited successful clinical performance with both total-etch and two-step self-etch adhesives at the end of five-years.

Objective:To investigate the effect of a prophylaxis paste on surface roughness of different composites, enamel, dentin and porcelain surfaces.Methods:Three different composites (FiltekZ250/Group1, Filtek Supreme XT/Group2, Premise/Group3), enamel/Group4, dentin/Group5 and porcelain/Group6 samples were used in this study. All specimens were prepared flat by SiC discs and polished with a diamond polishing paste. The surface roughness measurements were determined with a profilometer after polishing (initial surface roughness). Prophylaxis paste was applied to the samples for 12 seconds, renewing every 6 seconds. After cleaning the samples, roughness values were measured again. Data were analyzed by Kruskal Wallis and Dunn’s multiple comparison test. Wilcoxon test was performed for the comparison of the initial and final surface roughness values (P<.05). The results were evaluated within the P<.05 confidence level.Results:The initial and final surface roughness values (μm) were determined as follows: Group1: 0.039±0.009 and 0.157±0.018, Group2: 0.023±0.005 and 0.145±0.027, Group3: 0.028±0.008 and 0.109±0.012, Group4: 0.024±0.006 and 0.071±0.015, Group5: 0.030±0.007 and 0.143±0.029, Group6: 0.024±0.006 and 0.064±0.014. Significant difference was determined between the initial and final values for all groups.Conclusions:Composite and dentin surfaces were more affected by the application of prophylaxis paste than enamel and porcelain surfaces. The prophylaxis paste increased the surface roughness of all groups, but did not reach the bacterial retention roughness rate of 0.2μm.

The 2.1-W and 4.8-W laser ablation did not show any statistically difference for RelyX Unicem and Multilink Automix materials. However, in the SmartCem2 group, laser irradiated with 30 Hz/160 mJ application increased the bond-strength values, and the highest bond-strength results were obtained in this group.

No abstract