Five-year clinical evaluation of a universal adhesive: A randomized double-blind trial |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. School of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, PR, Brazil;2. University of Minnesota, School of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Sciences, Minneapolis, MN, USA;3. Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, State University of West Paraná, Cascavel, PR, Brazil;4. Methodist University, Santos, SP, Brazil;5. School of Dentistry, Centro de Ensino Superior dos Campos Gerais, Ponta Grossa, PR, Brazil;6. Postgraduate Program in Dentistry, University Northern Parana, Londrina, PR, Brazil |
| |
Abstract: | ObjectiveTo evaluate the five-year clinical performance of Scotchbond Universal Adhesive (SU; 3M Oral Care, St. Paul, MN, USA) in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) using two evaluation criteria.MethodsThirty-nine patients participated in this study. Two hundred restorations were assigned to four groups: SU-ERm: etch-and-rinse + moist dentin; SU-ERd: etch-and-rinse + dry dentin; SU-Set: selective enamel etching; and SU-SE: self-etch. A nanofilled composite resin was placed incrementally. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 5 years using both the World Dental Federation (FDI) and the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. The survival rates (retention/fractures) were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier and the log-rank test. For the secondary outcomes, Friedman repeated measures analysis of variance by rank was applied (α = 0.05).ResultsAfter 5 years the recall rate was 86%. The retention/fracture rates were 93% for Erm and ERd, 88.4% for SEet and 81.4% for SE. A significant difference was observed for SE vs. ERd and SE vs. ERm (p = 0.01). Also, marginal discoloration and adaptation showed significant differences with ERm and ERd resulting in fewer marginal discrepancies than SE (p < 0.05).SignificanceAfter 5 years, the clinical behavior of the universal adhesive in the etch-and-rinse strategy was better when compared to the self-etch strategy. The use of selective enamel etching is highly recommended for the self-etch strategy. The FDI and USPHS evaluation criteria showed similar results after 5 years. |
| |
Keywords: | Universal adhesives Randomized clinical trial Etch-and-rinse Self-etch Selective enamel etching |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|