Randomized Clinical Trial of Four Adhesion Strategies in Posterior Restorations—18‐Month Results

Abstract

When used in ideal clinical conditions, the composition of current dentin adhesives may be more clinically relevant than their adhesion strategy.

Randomized clinical trial of five adhesive systems in occlusal restorations: One-year results

“…In fact, most short-term studies involving posterior restorations with self-etch adhesive systems report less extensive loss of marginal integrity than the current work 7,31,32) . However, the results presented here are consistent with those of the study implemented by Perdigão et al, in which the one step self-etch adhesives disclosed significantly worse marginal integrity, color matching, surface texture and occlusal function in relation to the two step etch-and-rinse system studied 33) .…”

“…Among the five adhesive systems used in the present study, OBFL and CSEB were selected for being considered gold standard 6) for enamel and dentin bonding procedures due to their excellent and consistent results in some clinical trials with two years of followup 7,11,19) . The remaining adhesives were chosen from a single manufacturer in order to test alternative adhesive application modes within etch-and-rinse and self-etch approaches.…”

“…This mechanism relies on the replacement of inorganic tooth material by resin monomers that become micromechanically interlocked to the substrate 3,4) . However, molecule chemistry, specificity, proportion of the incorporated ingredients and their interaction with different tooth structures varies greatly between adhesive systems with impact on the quality of the bond provided by each system [5][6][7] .…”

Randomized Clinical Trial of Composite Restorations in Primary Teeth: Effect of Adhesive System after Three Years

“…There has been no other clinical study that tested the four current adhesive systems in primary teeth whereas studies with these adhesive systems in permanent teeth have been reported [41, 42]. Delbons et al [41] reported no statistically significant differences among the four adhesive systems with respect to all parameters including retention, marginal adaptation, and staining.…”

“…Delbons et al [41] reported no statistically significant differences among the four adhesive systems with respect to all parameters including retention, marginal adaptation, and staining. In a recent systemic review and a meta-analysis, it was concluded that besides adhesive strategy (i.e., etch-and-rinse versus self-etch), the specific brand is also important as there is a wide variation in the performance of adhesive systems [43, 44].…”