Clinical Effectiveness of Different Polishing Systems and Self-Etch Adhesives in Class V Composite Resin Restorations: Two-Year Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
J-H Jang ◽  
H-Y Kim ◽  
S-M Shin ◽  
C-O Lee ◽  
DS Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Class V ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Resin Restorations

SUMMARY The aim of this randomized controlled clinical trial was to compare the clinical effectiveness of different polishing systems and self-etch adhesives in class V composite resin restorations. A total of 164 noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) from 35 patients were randomly allocated to one of four experimental groups, each of which used a combination of polishing systems and adhesives. The two polishing systems used were Sof-Lex XT (Sof), a multistep abrasive disc, and Enhance/Pogo (EP), a simplified abrasive-impregnated rubber instrument. The adhesive systems were Clearfil SE bond (CS), a two-step self-etch adhesive, and Xeno V (XE), a one-step self-etch adhesive. All NCCLs were restored with light-cured microhybrid resin composites (Z250). Restorations were evaluated at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months by two blinded independent examiners using modified FDI criteria. The Fisher exact test and generalized estimating equation analysis considering repeated measurements were performed to compare the outcomes between the polishing systems and adhesives. Three restorations were dislodged: two in CS/Sof and one in CS/EP. None of the restorations required any repair or retreatment except those showing retention loss. Sof was superior to EP with regard to surface luster, staining, and marginal adaptation (p<0.05). CS and XE did not show differences in any criteria (p>0.05). Sof is clinically superior to EP for polishing performance in class V composite resin restoration. XE demonstrates clinically equivalent bonding performance to CS.

scholarly journals Effect of Cavity Disinfection with Chlorhexidine on Marginal Gap of Class V Composite Restorations Bonded with a Universal Adhesive Using Self-Etch and Etch-and-Rinse Bonding Strategy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soodabeh Kimyai ◽  
Narmin Mohammadi ◽  
Mahmoud Bahari ◽  
Elahe Pesyanian ◽  
Farhood Pesyanian
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Gap Size ◽  
Marginal Gap ◽  
Universal Adhesive ◽  
Class V ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Resin Restorations

Objectives: This in-vitro study aimed to evaluate the effect of cavity disinfection with chlorhexidine (CHX) on marginal gaps of Class V composite resin restorations bonded with a universal adhesive using self-etch and etch-and-rinse bonding strategy. Materials and Methods: Sixty sound human premolars were randomly assigned to two groups (n=30): group 1 (CHX) and group 2 (no CHX). Each group was divided into two subgroups (n=15) according to the bonding strategy of the universal adhesive (self-etch or etch-and-rinse). Class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surfaces of the teeth. The occlusal and gingival margins of the cavities were placed in enamel and dentin, respectively. In the first and second subgroups of both groups, the All-Bond Universal adhesive was applied with self-etch and etch-and-rinse bonding strategy, respectively. After restoration and thermocycling, the samples were sectioned, and marginal gaps at the gingival margins were measured in micrometer (µm) under a stereomicroscope. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare marginal gaps between the groups and the subgroups. Results: The mean marginal gap size was significantly affected by cavity disinfection (P=0.001) and bonding strategy (P=0.002). However, the interaction effect of these two factors on the mean marginal gap size was not significant (P=0.79). Conclusion: The use of CHX resulted in larger marginal gaps at the gingival margins of Class V composite resin restorations. Irrespective of disinfection, the self-etch bonding strategy resulted in larger marginal gaps compared to the etch-and-rinse bonding strategy.

Comparision of two fluoride varnishes for controlling white spot lesions. Randomized clinical trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesús Alberto Luengo - Fereira
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
White Spot ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
White Spot Lesions ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
The Mean

Objective: To compare two fluorinated varnishes for the control of white spot lesions.Material and Methods: A randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted. A total of 103 active whitespot lesions on permanent upper anterior teeth from 24 patients, aged 7 to 9 years were randomly assigned totwo groups, G1: Duraphat® (n=52) and G2: DuraShield® (n=51). Weekly applications were perform for fourconsecutive weeks. Fifth week the dimension, regression and activity of the lesions were evaluated. Student’sT test, Wilcoxon Ranks and Chi square were used at 5% significance. Results: At the end of the study, the lesion reduction was observed in 69.7%, finding significant differences(p<0.05) in the mean of the initial and final dimensions in general (2.74 mm to 1.91 mm) and in each group, G1(2.84 mm to 2.03 mm), G2 (2.64 mm to 1.78 mm). In the activity of the lesions, it was found in the G1, 12 active and6 inactive lesions; while in G2, there were 14 active and 29 inactive; these differences were significant (p<0.05). Conclusions: The two evaluated products showed similar clinical efficacy in the remineralization of activewhite spot lesions after 4 weeks of therapy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document