Literature DB >> 26122377

Does the adhesive strategy influence the post-operative sensitivity in adult patients with posterior resin composite restorations?: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Alessandra Reis1, Alessandro Dourado Loguercio2, Marcos Schroeder3, Issis Luque-Martinez2, Danielle Masterson4, Lucianne Cople Maia5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed on the risk and intensity of postoperative sensitivity (POS) in posterior resin composite restorations bonded with self-etch (SE) and etch-and-rinse (ER) adhesives. SOURCE: A comprehensive search was performed in the MEDLINE via PubMeb, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, BBO and Cochrane Library and SIGLE without restrictions. The abstracts of the annual conference of the IADR (1990-2014), unpublished and ongoing trials registry were also searched. Dissertations and theses were searched using the ProQuest Dissertations and Periodicos Capes Theses databases. STUDY SELECTION: We included randomized clinical trials that compared the clinical effectiveness of SE and ER used for direct resin composite restorations in permanent dentition of adult patients. The risk/intensity of POS was the primary outcome. The risk of bias tool of the Cochrane Collaboration was used. The meta-analysis was performed on the studies considered 'low' risk of bias. DATA: After duplicates removal, 2600 articles were identified but only 29 remained in the qualitative synthesis. Five were considered to be 'high' risk of bias and eleven were considered to be 'unclear' in the key domains, yielding 13 studies for meta-analysis. The overall relative risk of the spontaneous POS was 0.63 (95% CI 0.35 to 1.15), while the stimuli-induced POS was 0.99 (95% CI 0.63 to 1.56). The overall standardized mean difference was 0.08 (95%CI -0.19 to 0.35). No overall effect was revealed in the meta-analyses, meaning that no influence of the ER or SE strategy on POS. SIGNIFICANCE: The type of adhesive strategy (ER or SE) for posterior resin composite restorations does not influence the risk and intensity of POS. CRD42014006617.
Copyright © 2015 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adhesive system; Posterior restoration; Postoperative sensitivity; Randomized clinical trials; Systematic review

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26122377     DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2015.06.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dent Mater        ISSN: 0109-5641            Impact factor:   5.304


  10 in total

1.  Thirty-six-month clinical evaluation of posterior high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composite restorations in a high caries incidence population: interim results of a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Márcia de Almeida Durão; Ana Karina Maciel de Andrade; Amanda Maciel do Prado; Sirley Raiane Mamede Veloso; Lynn Morena Tavares Maciel; Marcos Antônio Japiassú Resende Montes; Gabriela Queiroz de Melo Monteiro
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-04-06       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Influence of surface treatment on the performance of silorane-based composite resin in class I restorations: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Isabella Pereira Marques; Fabíola Belkiss Santos de Oliveira; João Gabriel Silva Souza; Raquel Conceição Ferreira; Claudia Silami Magalhães; Fabiana Mantovani Gomes França; Daniela Araújo Veloso Popoff
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2018-02-16       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Which adhesive strategy for non-carious cervical lesions?

Authors:  Julie Coe
Journal:  Evid Based Dent       Date:  2017-12-22

Review 4.  Is the clinical performance of composite resin restorations in posterior teeth similar if restored with incremental or bulk-filling techniques? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Patrícia Valéria Manozzo Kunz; Letícia Maíra Wambier; Marina da Rosa Kaizer; Gisele Maria Correr; Alessandra Reis; Carla Castiglia Gonzaga
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2022-01-15       Impact factor: 3.606

5.  Evaluation of Post-Operative Sensitivity of Bulk Fill Resin Composite versus Nano Resin Composite: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study.

Authors:  Sarah Mahmoud Hussien Afifi; Mohamed Fouad Haridy; Mohamed Riad Farid
Journal:  Open Access Maced J Med Sci       Date:  2019-07-26

6.  Effect of a Self-Etch Adhesive Containing Nanobioglass on Postoperative Sensitivity of Posterior Composite Restorations - A Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Ahmed Zakaria Aboelenein; Mona Ismail Riad; Mohammed Fouad Haridy
Journal:  Open Access Maced J Med Sci       Date:  2019-07-25

7.  The effect of ethanol wet bonding technique on postoperative hypersensitivity of Class II composite restorations: A randomized trial.

Authors:  Alireza Boruziniat; Sanaz Alizadeh; Mahshid Gifani; Zafer C Cehreli; Yeganeh Khazaei
Journal:  Dent Res J (Isfahan)       Date:  2021-11-22

Review 8.  Does immediate dentin sealing influence postoperative sensitivity in teeth restored with indirect restorations? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Uros Josic; Maicon Sebold; Rodrigo B E Lins; Jelena Savovic; Claudia Mazzitelli; Tatjana Maravic; Annalisa Mazzoni; Lorenzo Breschi
Journal:  J Esthet Restor Dent       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 3.040

Review 9.  Current perspectives on dental adhesion: (1) Dentin adhesion - not there yet.

Authors:  Jorge Perdigão
Journal:  Jpn Dent Sci Rev       Date:  2020-09-23

10.  Direct Pulp Capping: Which is the Most Effective Biomaterial? A Retrospective Clinical Study.

Authors:  Anabela Paula; Eunice Carrilho; Mafalda Laranjo; Ana M Abrantes; João Casalta-Lopes; Maria Filomena Botelho; Carlos Miguel Marto; Manuel M Ferreira
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2019-10-16       Impact factor: 3.623

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.