Bonding Performance of Simplified Adhesive Systems in Noncarious Cervical Lesions at 2-year Follow-up: A Double-blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract

SUMMARY Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the bonding performance of a universal adhesive used according to self-etching or etch-and-rinse protocols in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) and to compare the two protocols with their respective gold standard techniques. Methods and Materials: This randomized, double-blind clinical study enrolled 34 participants who met the inclusion criteria, 29 of whom returned after two years. They received 152 restorations bonded with one of the three adhesives (Scotchbond Universal Adhesive, Adper Single Bond 2, or Clearfil SE Bond) and one of the two bonding techniques tested. The NCCLs were restored with nanocomposite resin (Filtek Supreme). Final contours were done with a fine diamond rotary instrument and polished with rubber points. The restorations were evaluated using the FDI World Dental Federation criteria at baseline (seven days after the restoration procedure), 6, 12, and 24 months. Descriptive statistics, Kruskal-Wallis, Friedman analysis of variance, and least significant difference tests were performed. Results: No statistically significant differences were found in esthetics or the functional and biological evaluated criteria among the adhesive systems and techniques. Conclusions: The Scotchbond Universal system behaved similarly to the conventional etch-and-rinse or self-etching systems in all the adhesion strategies in the evaluated periods.

Adhesive dentistry: Current concepts and clinical considerations

“…The 2‐year effectiveness of SBU in both SE and E&R modes was also compared with those of a two‐step E&R adhesive (Adper Single Bond Plus, 3M Oral Care) and a two‐step SE adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray Noritake Dental, Inc.). SBU behaved similarly to the other two adhesives at 2 years regardless of the adhesion strategy 58 …”

“…SBU behaved similarly to the other two adhesives at 2 years regardless of the adhesion strategy. 58 The E&R and the selective enamel etching strategies provided better clinical outcomes with All-Bond Universal (Bisco, Inc., Schaumburg, IL) and Gluma Universal (Kulzer North America, South Bend, IN) at 2 years. 43 Adhese Universal (ADU, Ivoclar Vivadent, Amherst, NY) resulted in very good in vitro and clinical results after up to 3 years.…”

Margin Integrity of Bulk-Fill Composite Restorations in Primary Teeth

“…Thus, in the present study, no capping layer was placed on top of the flowable bulk-fill materials under investigation. The universal adhesive Scotchbond Universal was selected because it showed reliable results in both laboratory [ 33 , 34 , 35 ] and clinical studies [ 36 , 37 ]. To ensure time-saving application in the treatment of children, the universal adhesive was used in self-etch mode and thus was in line with previous studies [ 38 , 39 ].…”

Effect of adhesive strategy on non-carious cervical lesions pre-conditioned with bioactive glass air-abrasion: a randomised controlled clinical trial

“…The restoration of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) exhibits a clinical challenge attributed to the lack of a macro-mechanical cavity retention, the location of the cervical margins close to the gingivae, the cervical exure that occurs in the tooth during function and the existence of hyper-mineralised dentine surfaces [1]. Static / cyclic stress and erosion / abrasion alter signi cantly the dentine structure and morphology which in turn, reduces the survival rate of resin composite restorations [2,3]. Previous investigations have revealed that the retention rate and marginal discoloration of resin composite restorations in NCCLs are not signi cantly in uenced by resin type or viscosity [4][5][6].…”

“…Previous investigations have revealed that the retention rate and marginal discoloration of resin composite restorations in NCCLs are not signi cantly in uenced by resin type or viscosity [4][5][6]. Resin composite restorations placed with etch-and-rinse (ER), self-etch (SE) or universal adhesive systems produced similar retention and post-operative sensitivity (POS), implying that the adhesive strategy does not in uence their clinical behaviour in NCCLs [2,7,8]. Dentine surface roughening may enhance the retention rate of resin composite restorations in NCCLs since this disrupts the hypermineralised dentine and improves hybrid layer formation [9].…”