Issis Luque-Martinez1, Miguel Angel Muñoz1, Alexandra Mena-Serrano2, Viviane Hass3, Alessandra Reis3, Alessandro D Loguercio4. 1. Faculty of Dentistry, University of Valparaiso, Calle Subida Carvallo, 211, Playa Ancha, Valparaiso CEP 2360004, Chile. 2. School of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Universidad de las Americas, Av. de los Granados E12-41y Colimes esq., Quito EC170125, Ecuador. 3. Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Rua Carlos Cavalcanti, 4748, Uvaranas, Ponta Grossa, Paraná CEP 84030-900, Brazil. 4. Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Rua Carlos Cavalcanti, 4748, Uvaranas, Ponta Grossa, Paraná CEP 84030-900, Brazil. Electronic address: aloguercio@hotmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the 18-month retention rates of composite restorations in non-carious cervical lesions [NCCLs] bonded with a self-etch adhesive with and without preliminary conditioning with EDTA. METHODS:Forty-eight patients with two similar-sized NCCL were selected and randomly allocated to one of two groups. Two calibrated operators placed 96 restorations with a one-step self-etch adhesive (Adper Easy One, 3M ESPE). Half of the restorations were placed according to the manufacturer's instructions while, for the other half, the surfaces of the lesions were conditioned with 17% EDTA for 2 min prior to adhesive application. Two blinded and independent examiners evaluated the restorations at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months, according to the FDI criteria. The comparison between groups in each period was conducted with the Fisher's exact test, and the performance of each group at the different periods was evaluated by McNemar's test (α=0.05). RESULTS: After 18 months, significantly higher retention rates (95% CI) were observed for the EDTA group (95.5 [84.9-98.7]) than the control group (79.6% [65.5-88.9]) (p=0.02). Significant deterioration of the marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration were observed for both groups over the 18-month evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: The preliminary conditioning with EDTA before application of a one-step self-etch adhesive significantly improved the retention rates of composite restorations in cervical lesions. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Conditioning with EDTA is an alternative that improves the 18-month retention rate of cervical restorations bonded with a self-etch adhesive.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the 18-month retention rates of composite restorations in non-carious cervical lesions [NCCLs] bonded with a self-etch adhesive with and without preliminary conditioning with EDTA. METHODS: Forty-eight patients with two similar-sized NCCL were selected and randomly allocated to one of two groups. Two calibrated operators placed 96 restorations with a one-step self-etch adhesive (Adper Easy One, 3M ESPE). Half of the restorations were placed according to the manufacturer's instructions while, for the other half, the surfaces of the lesions were conditioned with 17% EDTA for 2 min prior to adhesive application. Two blinded and independent examiners evaluated the restorations at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months, according to the FDI criteria. The comparison between groups in each period was conducted with the Fisher's exact test, and the performance of each group at the different periods was evaluated by McNemar's test (α=0.05). RESULTS: After 18 months, significantly higher retention rates (95% CI) were observed for the EDTA group (95.5 [84.9-98.7]) than the control group (79.6% [65.5-88.9]) (p=0.02). Significant deterioration of the marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration were observed for both groups over the 18-month evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: The preliminary conditioning with EDTA before application of a one-step self-etch adhesive significantly improved the retention rates of composite restorations in cervical lesions. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Conditioning with EDTA is an alternative that improves the 18-month retention rate of cervical restorations bonded with a self-etch adhesive.
Authors: Ranya Elsayed; Pheba Abraham; Mohamed E Awad; Zoya Kurago; Balasudha Baladhandayutham; Gary M Whitford; David H Pashley; Charles E McKenna; Mohammed E Elsalanty Journal: Bone Date: 2018-02-09 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Marcos O Barceleiro; Leticia S Lopes; Chane Tardem; Fernanda S Calazans; Thalita P Matos; Alessandra Reis; Abraham Lincoln Calixto; Alessandro D Loguercio Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2022-02-10 Impact factor: 3.573