OBJECTIVE: To measure 2-week postoperative sensitivity in Class II composite restorations placed with a self-etching adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond) or a total-etch adhesive (Prime&Bond NT) with or without a flowable composite as cervical increment. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Upon approval by the University of Guarulhos Committee on Human Subjects, 100 restorations were inserted in 46 patients who required Class II restorations in their molars and premolars. Enamel and dentin walls were conditioned with a self-etching primer (for Clearfil SE Bond) or etched with 34% phosphoric acid (for Prime&Bond NT). A 1- to 2-mm-thick increment of a flowable composite (Filtek Flow) was used in the proximal box in 50% of the restorations of each adhesive. Preparations were restored with a packable composite (Surefil). The restorations were evaluated preoperatively and 2 weeks postoperatively for sensitivity to cold, air, and masticatory forces using a visual analog scale. Marginal integrity of the accessible margins was also evaluated. Statistical analysis used a mixed linear model with subject as a random effect. RESULTS: Ninety-eight teeth from 44 subjects were observed at 2 weeks. The type of adhesive and use of flowable composite had no significant effects or interaction for any of the four outcomes of interest, ie, change from baseline to 2 weeks in sensitivity and response time for the cold or air stimulus. For the air stimulus, the overall average change from baseline was not significant for either sensitivity or response time. For the cold stimulus, the overall average change from baseline was significant for both sensitivity and response time. No case of sensitivity to masticatory forces was observed. CONCLUSION: No differences in postoperative sensitivity were observed between a self-etch adhesive and a total-etch adhesive at 2 weeks. The use of flowable composite did not decrease postoperative sensitivity.
OBJECTIVE: To measure 2-week postoperative sensitivity in Class II composite restorations placed with a self-etching adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond) or a total-etch adhesive (Prime&Bond NT) with or without a flowable composite as cervical increment. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Upon approval by the University of Guarulhos Committee on Human Subjects, 100 restorations were inserted in 46 patients who required Class II restorations in their molars and premolars. Enamel and dentin walls were conditioned with a self-etching primer (for Clearfil SE Bond) or etched with 34% phosphoric acid (for Prime&Bond NT). A 1- to 2-mm-thick increment of a flowable composite (Filtek Flow) was used in the proximal box in 50% of the restorations of each adhesive. Preparations were restored with a packable composite (Surefil). The restorations were evaluated preoperatively and 2 weeks postoperatively for sensitivity to cold, air, and masticatory forces using a visual analog scale. Marginal integrity of the accessible margins was also evaluated. Statistical analysis used a mixed linear model with subject as a random effect. RESULTS: Ninety-eight teeth from 44 subjects were observed at 2 weeks. The type of adhesive and use of flowable composite had no significant effects or interaction for any of the four outcomes of interest, ie, change from baseline to 2 weeks in sensitivity and response time for the cold or air stimulus. For the air stimulus, the overall average change from baseline was not significant for either sensitivity or response time. For the cold stimulus, the overall average change from baseline was significant for both sensitivity and response time. No case of sensitivity to masticatory forces was observed. CONCLUSION: No differences in postoperative sensitivity were observed between a self-etch adhesive and a total-etch adhesive at 2 weeks. The use of flowable composite did not decrease postoperative sensitivity.
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