Literature DB >> 20533626

Two-year clinical performance of Clearfil SE and Clearfil S3 in restoration of unabraded non-carious class V lesions.

Martha Goël Brackett1, Alejandro Dib, Guillermo Franco, Blanca E Estrada, William W Brackett.   

Abstract

This study was undertaken to evaluate the two-year clinical performance of a self-etching primer and a self-etching adhesive, both of which employ the same acidic monomer. Forty pairs of restorations of AP-X hybrid resin composite (Kuraray Co, Ltd, Osaka, Japan) were placed in caries-free cervical erosion/abfraction lesions. Based on insensitivity to air, the dentin in 62% of these lesions was considered to be sclerotic. The restorations were placed with no abrasion of tooth surfaces, except for cleaning with plain pumice and no use of phosphoric acid etching, which is counter to the manufacturer's instructions that call for etching of unprepared enamel. One restoration from each pair was placed using Clearfil SE Bond, an adhesive employing a self-etching primer, and the other was placed using Clearfil S3 Bond, a self-etching adhesive. To emulate the results likely to occur in a private practice, the restorations were placed by well-educated, experienced clinicians who had no particular expertise in adhesive dentistry research and who placed the restorations according only to their interpretation of the manufacturer's instructions. The restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline and at 6, 12 and 24 months, using modified Ryge/USPHS criteria. For both products, retention of 81%-84% of the restorations was observed over two years, which is lower than has been previously observed with these products and is likely due to limitations in the manufacturer's instructions compounded by inexperience of the operators in adhesive dentistry research. One restoration placed with each adhesive demonstrated secondary caries, which was probably attributable to the study being conducted in a non-fluoridated area and which reduced the percentages of clinically successful restorations to 78%-81%. No statistically significant difference (p = 0.50) between the two adhesives was observed in overall performance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20533626     DOI: 10.2341/09-266-C

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oper Dent        ISSN: 0361-7734            Impact factor:   2.440


  10 in total

1.  Clinical effectiveness of a one-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions at 2 years.

Authors:  R Banu Ermis; Kirsten L Van Landuyt; Marcio Vivan Cardoso; Jan De Munck; Bart Van Meerbeek; Marleen Peumans
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-05-21       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Failure analysis of adhesive restorations with SEM and OCT: from marginal gaps to restoration loss.

Authors:  Tissiana Bortolotto; Jose Bahillo; Olivier Richoz; Farhad Hafezi; Ivo Krejci
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2015-02-01       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 3.  Adhesive strategies in cervical lesions: systematic review and a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Fabiana Dias Simas Dreweck; Adrieli Burey; Marcelo de Oliveira Dreweck; Alessandro D Loguercio; Alessandra Reis
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-03-04       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 4.  Durability of bonds and clinical success of adhesive restorations.

Authors:  Ricardo M Carvalho; Adriana P Manso; Saulo Geraldeli; Franklin R Tay; David H Pashley
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 5.304

5.  Comparison of two all-in-one adhesives bonded to non-carious cervical lesions--results at 3 years.

Authors:  Michael F Burrow; Martin J Tyas
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-07-26       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Eight-year clinical evaluation of two types of resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions.

Authors:  Kei Kaida; Shisei Kubo; Takafumi Egoshi; Yohsuke Taira
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2022-06-25       Impact factor: 3.606

7.  Three-year clinical evaluation of a two-step self-etch adhesive with or without selective enamel etching in non-carious cervical sclerotic lesions.

Authors:  Esra Can Say; Emre Özel; Haktan Yurdagüven; Mübin Soyman
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-11-22       Impact factor: 3.573

8.  Treatments for hypersensitive noncarious cervical lesions: a Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning (PEARL) Network randomized clinical effectiveness study.

Authors:  Analia Veitz-Keenan; Julie Ann Barna; Brad Strober; Abigail G Matthews; Damon Collie; Donald Vena; Frederick A Curro; Van P Thompson
Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 3.634

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

Authors:  Kirsten L Van Landuyt; Jan De Munck; R Banu Ermis; Marleen Peumans; Bart Van Meerbeek
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-08-15       Impact factor: 3.573

10.  Universal Adhesives and Adhesion Modes in Non-Carious Cervical Restorations: 2-Year Randomised Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Patricia Manarte-Monteiro; Joana Domingues; Liliana Teixeira; Sandra Gavinha; Maria Conceição Manso
Journal:  Polymers (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-22       Impact factor: 4.329

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.