Literature DB >> 14719760

Total-etch versus self-etch adhesive: effect on postoperative sensitivity.

Jorge Perdigão1, Saulo Geraldeli, James S Hodges.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Self-etching adhesives are believed to prevent postoperative sensitivity when used under posterior resin-based composite restorations. The authors tested a twofold hypothesis: a self-etch, or SE, adhesive would result in less postoperative sensitivity than a total-etch, or TE, adhesive; an SE adhesive would result in poorer enamel marginal integrity than a TE adhesive.
METHODS: Patients were selected on the basis of requiring Class I and II restorations in molars and premolars. The authors placed 30 restorations with the SE material (Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray America, New York) and 36 restorations with Prime & Bond NT (Dentsply Caulk, Milford, Del.), which uses 34 percent phosphoric acid to etch enamel and dentin simultaneously. Preparations were of standard design, with all margins in enamel without beveling. Upon rubber dam isolation, the authors conditioned the enamel and dentin walls with the self-etching primer (for Clearfil SE Bond) or etched with the proprietary 34 percent phosphoric acid (for Prime & Bond NT), followed by application of the corresponding dentin adhesive. Teeth were restored with the proprietary hybrid resin-based composite indicated for posterior restorations: Clearfil AP-X for Clearfil SE Bond or Esthet-X Micro Matrix Restorative for Prime & Bond NT. The restored teeth were evaluated preoperatively and at two weeks, eight weeks and six months postoperatively for sensitivity to cold (ice), air and masticatory forces, as well as for marginal discoloration.
RESULTS: Analysis of variance revealed no statistically significant differences in postoperative sensitivity between the SE and TE materials at any recall time. Marginal discoloration was rated as "absent" for all restorations at six months. Only one tooth displayed sensitivity to occlusal forces at six months.
CONCLUSION: The SE adhesive did not differ from the TE adhesive in regard to sensitivity and marginal discoloration. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Postoperative sensitivity may depend on the restorative technique rather than on the type of dentin adhesive used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14719760     DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2003.0109

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc        ISSN: 0002-8177            Impact factor:   3.634


  31 in total

1.  Effects of erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet and neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser hypersensitivity treatment parameters on the bond strength of self-etch adhesives.

Authors:  E Yazici; S Gurgan; N Gutknecht; S Imazato
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2009-05-28       Impact factor: 3.161

2.  Postoperative hypersensitivity in class I resin-based composite restorations in general practice: interim results.

Authors:  Gary S Berkowitz; Allan J Horowitz; Fredrick A Curro; Ronald G Craig; Jonathan A Ship; Donald Vena; Van P Thompson
Journal:  Compend Contin Educ Dent       Date:  2009 Jul-Aug

3.  Eight-year randomized clinical evaluation of Class II nanohybrid resin composite restorations bonded with a one-step self-etch or a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive.

Authors:  Jan W V van Dijken; Ulla Pallesen
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Comparison of Micro-Leakage from Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Restorations in Cavities Prepared by Er:YAG (Erbium-Doped Yttrium Aluminum Garnet) Laser and Conventional Method in Primary Teeth.

Authors:  Zahra Bahrololoomi; Forooghosadat Razavi; Ali Asghar Soleymani
Journal:  J Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2014

5.  Class II composite resin restorations: faster, easier, predictable.

Authors:  R D Jackson
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 1.626

6.  Restoration variables and postoperative hypersensitivity in Class I restorations: PEARL Network findings. Part 2.

Authors:  Peter Blanchard; Ying Wong; Abigail G Matthews; Donald Vena; Ronald G Craig; Frederick A Curro; Van P Thompson
Journal:  Compend Contin Educ Dent       Date:  2013-04

7.  Effect of a non-thermal, atmospheric-pressure, plasma brush on conversion of model self-etch adhesive formulations compared to conventional photo-polymerization.

Authors:  Mingsheng Chen; Ying Zhang; Xiaomei Yao; Hao Li; Qingsong Yu; Yong Wang
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 5.304

8.  Is it the end of the road for dental amalgam? A critical review.

Authors:  Arvind Shenoy
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2008-07

9.  A prospective 8-year follow-up of posterior resin composite restorations in permanent teeth of children and adolescents in Public Dental Health Service: reasons for replacement.

Authors:  Ulla Pallesen; Jan W V van Dijken; Jette Halken; Anna-Lena Hallonsten; Ruth Höigaard
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-07-20       Impact factor: 3.573

10.  Microleakage and scanning electron microscopy evaluation of all-in-one self-etch adhesives and their respective nanocomposites prepared by erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser and bur.

Authors:  Yonca Korkmaz; Emre Ozel; Nuray Attar; Ceren Ozge Bicer; Erhan Firatli
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2009-04-27       Impact factor: 3.161

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.