scholarly journals Clinical Performance of One-step Self-etch Adhesives Applied Actively in Cervical Lesions: 24-month Clinical Trial

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 228-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Zander-Grande ◽  
R C Amaral ◽  
AD Loguercio ◽  
LP Barroso ◽  
A Reis
Keyword(s):  
Generalized Linear Model ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Retention Rates ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Application Rates ◽  
Mode Of Application ◽  
Application Mode ◽  
One Step ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Self Etch

SUMMARY Objectives To evaluate the clinical performance of two one-step self-etch adhesives in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCL) under active or passive application mode. Methods Thirty-one patients with four NCCL were enrolled in this study. One hundred and twenty-four restorations were placed according to one of the following conditions: 1) Adper Prompt L-Pop (AP), active application (APA); 2) AP, passive application (APP); 3) Xeno III (XE), active application (XEA), or 4) XE, passive application (XEP). The restorations were evaluated by the FDI World Dental Federation criteria at baseline and after six, 12, and 24 months of clinical service. The effects of adhesive, mode of application, and recall period were assessed via mixed generalized linear model (α=0.05). Results The adhesive AP and the passive application mode showed significantly higher marginal staining than did XE and active application, respectively (p<0.05). With regard to the retention rates, the active application mode yielded higher retention rates at the 24-month recall compared to the passive application, regardless of the material. The individual retention rates (95% confidence interval) of both adhesives in the active application mode were the same, 96.8% (83.8-99.4%), while in the passive application rates were 87.1% (71.2-94.9%) and 80.7% (63.7-90.8%) for XE and AP, respectively. Conclusions The active application improved the retention rates of both adhesives after 24 months and minimized the marginal staining at enamel margins.

A New Dual-cure Universal Simplified Adhesive: 18-month Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. E255-E270
Author(s):  
E Gomes de Albuquerque ◽  
F Warol ◽  
F Signorelli Calazans ◽  
L Augusto Poubel ◽  
S Soares Marins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Retention Rates ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Universal Adhesive ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity

Clinical Relevance Non-carious cervical lesion restorations using a dual-cure universal adhesive in self-etch and etch-and-rinse mode showed satisfactory clinical performance after 18 months. SUMMARY Objectives: The objective of this multicenter, double-blind, split-mouth randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical performance of a new dual-cure universal adhesive system (Futurabond U, Voco GmBH) when applied using different strategies over a period of 18 months. Methods and Materials: Fifty patients participated in this study. Two hundred non-carious cervical lesions were restored using the adhesive Futurabond U according to four adhesive strategies (n=50 per group): only self-etch (SEE), selective enamel etching + self-etch (SET), etch-and-rinse with dry dentin (ERDry), and etch-and-rinse with wet dentin (ERWet). After the adhesive application, cavities were restored using Admira Fusion composite resin. These restorations were evaluated according to FDI World Dental Federation criteria for the following characteristics: retention/fracture, marginal adaptation, marginal staining, postoperative sensitivity, and caries recurrence. Results: After 18 months, only four patients (12 months: one patient, n=4 restorations; and 18 months: three patients, n=12 restorations) were not evaluated. Fourteen restorations were lost after 18 months of clinical evaluation (four for SEE, three for SET, three for ERDry, and four for ERWet). The retention rates for 18 months (95% confidence interval) were 92% (81%–97%) for SEE, 94% (83%–97%) for SET, 94% (83%–97%) for ERDry, and 92% (81%–97%) for ERWet (p>0.05). Thirty-eight restorations were considered to have minor discrepancies in marginal adaptation at the 18-month recall (13 for SEE, 13 for SET, six for ERDry, and six for ERWet; p>0.05). Fourteen restorations were detected as a minor marginal discoloration at the 18-month recall (six for SEE, six for SET, one for ERDry, and one for ERWet; p>0.05). However, all were considered clinically acceptable. No restorations showed postoperative sensitivity or caries recurrence at the time. Conclusion: The clinical performance of the Futurabond U did not depend on the bonding strategy used, and it was considered reliable after 18 months of clinical evaluation, although more marginal discrepancy was observed in the self-etch group.

Clinical Effectiveness of a Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement and a Mild One-step Self-etch Adhesive Applied Actively and Passively in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: An 18-Month Clinical Trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 581-592
Author(s):  
M Jassal ◽  
S Mittal ◽  
S Tewari
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Retention Rates ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity

SUMMARY Objectives: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of two methods of application of a mild one-step self-etch adhesive and composite resin as compared with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) control restoration in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs). Methods: A total of 294 restorations were placed in 56 patients, 98 in each one of the following groups: 1) G-Bond active application combined with Solare-X composite resin (A-1SEA), 2) G-Bond passive application combined with Solare-X composite resin (P-1SEA), and 3) GC II LC RMGIC. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after six, 12, and 18 months according to the FDI criteria for fractures/retention, marginal adaptation, marginal staining, postoperative sensitivity, and secondary caries. Cumulative failure rates were calculated for each criterion at each recall period. The effect of adhesive, method of application, and recall period were assessed. The Kruskal-Wallis test for intergroup comparison and Friedman and Wilcoxon signed ranks tests for intragroup comparison were used for each criterion (α=0.05). Results: The retention rates at 18 months were 93.26% for the A-1SEA group, 86.21% for the P-1SEA group, and 90.91% for the RMGIC group. The active application improved the retention rates compared with the passive application of mild one-step self-etch adhesive; however, no statistically significant difference was observed between the groups. Marginal staining was observed in 13 restorations (1 in A-1SEA, 4 in P-1SEA, and 8 in RMGIC) with no significant difference between the groups. The RMGIC group showed a significant increase in marginal staining at 12 and 18 months from the baseline. There was no significant difference between the groups for marginal adaptation, secondary caries, or postoperative sensitivity. Conclusion: Within the limitations of the study, we can conclude that mild one-step self-etch adhesive followed by a resin composite restoration can be an alternative to RMGIC with similar retention and improved esthetics in restoration of NCCLs. Agitation could possibly benefit the clinical performance of mild one-step self-etch adhesives, but this study did not confirm that the observed benefit was statistically significant.

Five-year clinical performance of a HEMA-free one-step self-etch adhesive in noncarious cervical lesions

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten L. Van Landuyt ◽  
Jan De Munck ◽  
R. Banu Ermis ◽  
Marleen Peumans ◽  
Bart Van Meerbeek
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch

scholarly journals Conversion of a one-step self-etch adhesive into a two-step self-etch adhesive: six-months clinical results in non-carious cervical lesions

2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 28
Author(s):  
Neimar Sartori ◽  
Renan Belli ◽  
Jackeline Coutinho Guimarães ◽  
Silvana Batalha ◽  
Sylvio Monteiro Jr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Clinical Success ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch

PURPOSE: The purpose of this randomized controlled clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical performance of a one-step self-etch adhesive system in non-carious cervical lesions with and without the application of an additional hydrophobic resin coat. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-four non-carious cervical lesions were selected and randomly assigned to one of the two bonding technique: 1) a one-step self-etch adhesive (Adper Easy Bond, 3M ESPE) was applied following manufacturer´s instructions; 2) a hydrophobic resin coat (Scotchbond Multipurpose Bonding Agent, 3M ESPE) was applied over the uncured Adper Easy Bond adhesive. All lessons were restored using a microhybrid composite resin (Filtek Z250, 3M ESPE). Clinical effectiveness was recorded at baseline and after 6-months of clinical service. RESULTS: Two restorations of each group debonded after a 6-months period. The overall clinical success was 93.8%, and no statistical significant differences could be detected for all evaluated criteria within this period. CONCLUSION: The applications of a hydrophobic resin coat over Easy Bond did not increase bonding effectiveness over a 6-months period.

The Clinical Effectiveness of Various Adhesive Systems: An 18-Month Evaluation

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
H Moosavi ◽  
S Kimyai ◽  
M Forghani ◽  
R Khodadadi
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Retention Rate ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
United States Public Health ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Public Health Services ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch

SUMMARY The aim of this clinical trial was to compare the clinical performance of three different adhesive systems over 18 months in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs). Thirty patients, with at least three noncarious cervical lesions, were enrolled in the study. One operator randomly restored a total of 90 lesions with resin composite (Herculite XRV). The restorations were bonded with either Optibond FL (OF), three-step total-etch; Optibond Solo Plus (OS), two-step total-etch; or Optibond All-In-One (OA), one step self-etch. The restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline and after six, 12, and 18 months using the eight United States Public Health Services criteria. Data were analyzed using Friedman and Wilcoxon signed ranks tests (p<0.05). After 18 months, the retention rate was (OF) 96.5%, (OS) 93.1%, and (OA) 89.7%. Differences among the three adhesive systems for evaluated criteria were not observed in comparison of the mean Alfa score percentages. There was a significant increase in marginal discoloration for (OA) adhesive after 18 months compared with baseline (p=0.011). Other restoration criteria had no statistically significant differences among the three adhesives (p>0.05). With the exception of marginal discoloration, the clinical effectiveness of three types of adhesive systems in NCCLs was acceptable after 18 months. However, using the one-step self-etch adhesive may lead to some marginal discolorations.

Three-year clinical performance of a HEMA-free one-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions

2011 ◽  
Vol 119 (6) ◽  
pp. 511-516 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten L. Van Landuyt ◽  
Marleen Peumans ◽  
Jan De Munck ◽  
Marcio V. Cardoso ◽  
Banu Ermis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch

Randomized Clinical Trial of Four Adhesion Strategies: 18-Month Results

2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Perdigão ◽  
M Dutra-Corrêa ◽  
CHC Saraceni ◽  
MT Ciaramicoli ◽  
VH Kiyan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retention Rate ◽  
Recall Rate ◽  
Retention Rates ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
One Step ◽  
Initial Placement ◽  
Self Etch

Clinical Relevance The 18-month retention rate of the two self-etch adhesives used in the present study was similar to that of two etch-and-rinse adhesives from the same manufacturer. However, the quality of enamel margins was significantly better for the two etch-and-rinse adhesives. SUMMARY Statement of the Problem With Institutional Review Board approval, 39 patients who needed restoration of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) were enrolled in this study. A total of 125 NCCLs were selected and randomly assigned to four groups: 1) a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive, Adper Scotchbond Multi-Purpose (MP, 3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA); 2) a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive, Adper Single Bond Plus (SB, 3M ESPE); 3) a two-step self-etch adhesive, Adper Scotchbond SE (SE, 3M ESPE); and 4) a one-step self-etch adhesive, Adper Easy Bond (EB, 3M ESPE). A nanofilled composite resin was used for all restorations. Restorations were evaluated at six months and 18 months using modified U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) parameters. Results At six months after initial placement, 107 restorations (85.6% recall rate) were evaluated. At 18 months, 94 restorations (75.2% recall rate) were available for evaluation. The 6 mo/18 mo overall retention rates (%) were 100/90.9 for MP; 100/91.7 for SB; 100/90.9 for SE; and 96.4/92.3 for EB with no statistical difference between any pair of groups at each recall. Sensitivity to air decreased significantly for all adhesives from the preoperative to the postoperative stage and was stable thereafter. Interfacial staining did not change statistically from baseline to six months; however, interfacial staining at the enamel margins was statistically worse at 18 months than at baseline for the two self-etch adhesives EB and SE. Marginal adaptation was statistically worse at 18 months compared with baseline only for EB. This tendency was already significant at the six-month recall. Conclusion Although 18-month retention was similar for the different adhesion strategies, enamel marginal deficiencies were more prevalent for the self-etch adhesives.

scholarly journals Clinical Effectiveness of a Hydrophobic Coating Used in Conjunction With a One-step Self-etch Adhesive: An 18-month Evaluation

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Sartori ◽  
LD Peruchi ◽  
JC Guimarães ◽  
SB Silva ◽  
S Monteiro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Clinical Success ◽  
Clinical Success Rate ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Bonding Layer ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Bonding System ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch

SUMMARY The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical performance of a one-step self-etch adhesive in noncarious cervical lesions with inclusion of a hydrophobic bonding layer not included in the original bonding system as a test of potentially improved bonding. Patients with noncarious cervical lesions received two or four restorations after being randomly assigned to two adhesive technique protocols (n=32): EB, application of Adper Easy Bond (3M ESPE) following manufacturer's instructions; and EB+B, application of Adper Easy Bond, immediately followed by the application of a hydrophobic resin coat (Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Bonding Agent, 3M ESPE). All restorations were restored with a microhybrid composite (Filtek Z250, 3M ESPE). Clinical effectiveness was recorded in terms of retention, marginal discoloration, marginal integrity, postoperative sensitivity, recurrent caries, periodontal health, and pulpal vitality, according to the modified USPHS criteria, for 18 months. Data were analyzed using chi-square, Fisher exact, and McNemar tests at α=0.05. Two restorations of each group were debonded after six months, leading to an overall clinical success rate of 93.8% for both groups. At the 18-month evaluation period, no new restoration was debonded. However, one restoration of the EB group displayed recurrent caries at the dentin margin, decreasing the overall success rate to 90.6% in comparison to 93.8% of EB+B. The success rate between EB and EB+B was not statistically significant (p=0.5). The application of a hydrophobic resin coat over EB did not increase bonding effectiveness in noncarious cervical lesions after 18 months.

scholarly journals One-Year Clinical Evaluation of the Bonding Effectiveness of a One-Step, Self-Etch Adhesive in Noncarious Cervical Lesion Therapy

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Babacar Faye ◽  
Mouhamed Sarr ◽  
Khaly Bane ◽  
Adjaratou Wakha Aidara ◽  
Seydina Ousmane Niang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Retention Rate ◽  
Recall Rate ◽  
Acid Etching ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Usphs Criteria ◽  
One Step ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One ◽  
Self Etch

This study evaluated the one-year clinical performance of a one-step, self-etch adhesive (Optibond All-in-One, Kerr, CA, USA) combined with a composite (Herculite XRV Ultra, Kerr Hawe, CA, USA) to restore NCCLs with or without prior acid etching. Restorations performed by the same practitioner were evaluated at baseline and after 3, 6, and 12 months using modified USPHS criteria. At 6 months, the recall rate was 100%. The retention rate was 84.2% for restorations with prior acid etching, but statistically significant differences were observed between baseline and 6 months. Without acid etching, the retention rate was 77%, and no statistically significant difference was noted between 3 and 6 months. Marginal integrity (93.7% with and 87.7% without acid etching) and discoloration (95.3% with and 92.9% without acid etching) were scored as Alpha or Bravo, with better results after acid etching. After one year, the recall rate was 58.06%. Loss of pulp vitality, postoperative sensitivity, or secondary caries were not observed. After one year retention rate was of 90.6% and 76.9% with and without acid conditioning. Optibond All-in-One performs at a satisfactory clinical performance level for restoration of NCCLs after 12 months especially after acid etching.

Catechin-based Dentin Pretreatment and the Clinical Performance of a Universal Adhesive: A Two-year Randomized Clinical Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 473-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
CAGA Costa ◽  
NLG Albuquerque ◽  
JS Mendonça ◽  
AD Loguercio ◽  
VPA Saboia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Retention Rates ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Single Bond ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Self Etch

Clinical Relevance At 24 months, the dentin pretreatment with epigallocatechin-3-gallate did not impair the clinical performance of the adhesive Single Bond Universal regardless of the bonding strategy used. SUMMARY Purpose: To evaluate the two-year effect of dentin pretreatment with epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) on the clinical performance of restorations of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) with Single Bond Universal, applied in two different modes (self-etch and etch-and-rinse). Methods and Materials: In this randomized clinical trial, 33 volunteers were selected, and 156 NCCLs were assigned to four groups: ER, etch-and-rinse; ER-EGCG, 0.1% EGCG dentin pretreatment + etch-and-rinse; SE, self-etch; and SE-EGCG, 0.1% EGCG dentin pretreatment + self-etch. The NCCLs were restored with a nanofilled resin composite and evaluated at baseline and at six, 12, 18, and 24 months using FDI criteria for retention, marginal staining, marginal adaptation, caries, and postoperative sensitivity. Two evaluators were blinded to the treatments performed, and impressions were taken for resin replicas to allow indirect observations. Statistical analyses were performed with Kruskal-Wallis and McNemar tests with a significance level of 5%. Results: Six restorations (one from ER, two from SE, one from ER-EGCG, and two from SEEGCG) were lost at 24 months with no significant differences (p>0.05). The retention rates were 97.0% (ER and ER-EGCG), 94.1% (SE), and 94.2% (SE-EGCG). For marginal adaptation, a significant difference was detected between the baseline and 24 months for the SE group (p=0.0313). There were no statistical differences among all other evaluated criteria at 24 months, neither for each group at baseline nor for 24-month comparisons (p>0.05). Conclusions: The pretreatment with EGCG provided no benefit in the clinical performance of the adhesive regardless of the bonding strategy used. In addition, it adds an additional required step to the restorative procedure.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document