Clinical Evaluation of a Two-step Etch&Rinse and a Two-step Self-etch Adhesive System in Class II Restorations: Two-year Results

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 656-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. B. Ermis ◽  
O. Kam ◽  
E. U. Celik ◽  
U. B. Temel
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Self Etch

Clinical Relevance The two-step etch&rinse and the two-step self-etch adhesive systems tested in this study demonstrated similar clinical performance in Class II cavities after two years.

A Randomized Clinical Evaluation of a One- and Two-step Self-etch Adhesive Over 24 Months

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. D. Loguercio ◽  
D. Mânica ◽  
F. Ferneda ◽  
C. Zander-Grande ◽  
R. Amaral ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Retention Rate ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
The Self ◽  
Bond Layer ◽  
Hydrophobic Bond ◽  
Self Etch

Clinical Relevance The application of an extra hydrophobic bond layer over the self-etch adhesive system improved clinical performance over a 24-month period, mainly in terms of retention rate.

Clinical Evaluation of a Silorane- and a Methacrylate-Based Resin Composite in Class II Restorations: 24-Month Results

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. E102-E110 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Karaman ◽  
AR Yazici ◽  
G Ozgunaltay ◽  
I Ustunkol ◽  
A Berber
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Restorative Materials ◽  
Chi Square Test ◽  
Self Etch

SUMMARY Objective: To compare the 24-month clinical performance of two different resin composites in class II slot restorations. Methods and Materials: Thirty-seven patients having at least two approximal carious lesions were enrolled in the study. A total of 116 teeth (58 pairs) were restored with either a silorane-based composite (Filtek Silorane) and its self-etch adhesive (Silorane Adhesive System, 3M ESPE) or a methacrylate-based packable resin composite (X-tra Fil) and its self-etch adhesive (Futurabond NR, VOCO GmbH) according to the toss of a coin. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and at six-, 12-, and 24-month recalls by two calibrated examiners according to the modified US Public Health Service criteria. The comparison of the two restorative materials for each category was performed with the Pearson chi-square test. Within group differences of the materials at different recall times were compared using the Cochran Q and Friedman tests. Bonferroni-adjusted McNemar test was used when significant difference was found (p<0.05). Results: After 24 months, no statistically significant differences were found between the two restorative materials for the criteria evaluated. Conclusions: Both silorane- and methacrylate-based resin composites showed clinically acceptable performance in class II slot restorations after 24 months.

scholarly journals Rebonding of Orthodontic Brackets

2008 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 531-536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mona A. Montasser ◽  
James L. Drummond ◽  
Carla A. Evans
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Orthodontic Brackets ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Adhesive Remnant Index ◽  
Acid Etch ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Self Etch

Abstract Objective: To compare rebonding of orthodontic brackets based on the hypothesis that no difference would be found between the adhesive systems with respect to shear bond strength, mode of failure, and clinical failure rates. Materials and Methods: The three adhesive systems included two self-etch primers (Transbond and M-Bond) and a conventional phosphoric acid etch (Rely-a-Bond). The sample size was 20 premolars for each adhesive system. The shear bond strength was tested 24 hours after bracket bonding with the bonding/debonding procedures repeated two times after the first debonding. Bond strength, adhesive remnant index (ARI), and failure sites were evaluated for each debonding. Statistical analysis consisted of a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Scheffè analysis. The clinical portion evaluated 15 patients over a 12-month period. Results: The mean shear bond strengths after the first, second, and third debondings for Rely-a-Bond were 8.4 ± 1.8, 10.3 ± 2.4, and 14.1 ± 3.3 MPa, respectively; for Transbond 11.1 ± 4.6, 13.6 ± 4.5, and 12.9 ± 4.4 MPa, respectively; and for M-Bond 8.7 ± 2.7, 10.4 ± 2.4, and 12.4 ± 3.4 MPa, respectively. After the three debondings the mean shear bond strength increased significantly from the first to the third debonding for Rely-a-Bond and M-bond (P ≤ .001), but did not change for Transbond (P = .199). Conclusions: The original hypothesis is not rejected. The two self-etching primers showing higher or comparable bond strength to the conventional phosphoric etch with less adhesive remnant on the enamel surface after the first debonding. With repeated bonding/debonding, the differences in the bond strength, ARI, and failure site were not significantly different. There was no difference in the clinical performance of the three adhesive systems (P = .667).

Clinical Evaluation of Resin-based Composites in Posterior Restorations: Two-year Results

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 397-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Arhun ◽  
C. Celik ◽  
K. Yamanel
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Posterior Restorations ◽  
Self Etch

Clinical Relevance Nanohybrid and low-shrinkage posterior resin composites, placed with self-etch adhesive systems in posterior teeth, showed satisfactory and similar results after two years.

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

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Secil Bektaş Donmez ◽  
Melek D. Turgut ◽  
Serdar Uysal ◽  
Pinar Ozdemir ◽  
Meryem Tekcicek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Teeth ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
The Self ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Self Etch

The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical performance of composite restorations placed with different adhesive systems in primary teeth. In 32 patients, 128 composite restorations were placed using a split-mouth design as follows (4 groups/patient): three-step etch-and-rinse (Group 1), two-step etch-and-rinse (Group 2), two-step self-etch (Group 3), and one-step self-etch (Group 4). The restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline and at 6, 18, and 36 months according to the FDI criteria. There was no significant difference between the adhesive systems in retention of the restorations (p>0.05). Over time, there was a statistically significant decrease in marginal adaptation in all groups, whereas surface and marginal staining significantly increased in Groups 3 and 4 (p<0.05). The etch-and-rinse adhesive systems resulted in better marginal adaptation than the self-etch adhesive systems (p<0.05). It was concluded that preetching of the primary enamel might help improve the clinical performance of the self-etch adhesive systems in primary teeth.

Five-year Clinical Evaluation of 300 Teeth Restored with Porcelain Laminate Veneers Using Total-etch and a Modified Self-etch Adhesive System

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 516-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Aykor ◽  
E. Ozel
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Tissue Response ◽  
Gingival Tissue ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Laminate Veneers ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity

Clinical Relevance Total-etch (Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus) and two-step self-etch (AdheSE) adhesive systems were successful in terms of marginal adaptation, cavosurface discoloration, secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity, satisfaction with restoration shade and gingival tissue response in a five-year follow-up.

Clinical Evaluation of a Nanofilled Fissure Sealant Placed with Different Adhesive Systems: 24-month Results

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 642-647 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. R. Yazici ◽  
E. Karaman ◽  
M. Baseren ◽  
D. Tuncer ◽  
E. Yazici ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Fissure Sealant ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Self Etch

Clinical Relevance The use of an etch-and-rinse adhesive prior to the placement of sealants yielded better retention than did the use of a self-etch adhesive.

Clinical Performance of a Two-step Self-etch Adhesive with Additional Enamel Etching in Class III Cavities

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. B. Ermis ◽  
U. B. Temel ◽  
E. U. Celik ◽  
O. Kam
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Class Iii ◽  
Self Etch

Clinical Relevance This mild, two-step self-etch adhesive system showed acceptable clinical performance in Class III cavities after three years. Additional etching of the enamel margins improved the marginal quality of restorations bonded with this adhesive system.

scholarly journals Resin Composite Restorations of Permanent Incisors with Crown Fractures: A Case Report with a Six-year Follow-up

2011 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Ozel ◽  
M. Karapinar-Kazandag ◽  
M. Soyman ◽  
G. Bayirli
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Patient Acceptance ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Self Etch

Clinical Relevance The teeth in this report were restored with a two-step self-etch adhesive system and a microhybrid resin composite. The teeth present with an excellent clinical performance and patient acceptance at the end of a six-year recall.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document