Thalita de Paris Matos1, Jorge Perdigão2, Eloisa de Paula3, Fabiana Coppla4, Viviane Hass5, Rafael F Scheffer6, Alessandra Reis1, Alessandro D Loguercio1. 1. School of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, PR, Brazil. 2. University of Minnesota, School of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Sciences, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Electronic address: perdi001@umn.edu. 3. Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, State University of West Paraná, Cascavel, PR, Brazil; Methodist University, Santos, SP, Brazil. 4. School of Dentistry, Centro de Ensino Superior dos Campos Gerais, Ponta Grossa, PR, Brazil. 5. Postgraduate Program in Dentistry, University Northern Parana, Londrina, PR, Brazil. 6. Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, State University of West Paraná, Cascavel, PR, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the five-year clinical performance of Scotchbond Universal Adhesive (SU; 3M Oral Care, St. Paul, MN, USA) in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) using two evaluation criteria. METHODS:Thirty-nine patients participated in this study. Two hundred restorations were assigned to four groups: SU-ERm: etch-and-rinse + moist dentin; SU-ERd: etch-and-rinse + dry dentin; SU-Set: selective enamel etching; and SU-SE: self-etch. A nanofilled composite resin was placed incrementally. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 5 years using both the World Dental Federation (FDI) and the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. The survival rates (retention/fractures) were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier and the log-rank test. For the secondary outcomes, Friedman repeated measures analysis of variance by rank was applied (α = 0.05). RESULTS: After 5 years the recall rate was 86%. The retention/fracture rates were 93% for Erm and ERd, 88.4% for SEet and 81.4% for SE. A significant difference was observed for SE vs. ERd and SE vs. ERm (p = 0.01). Also, marginal discoloration and adaptation showed significant differences with ERm and ERd resulting in fewer marginal discrepancies than SE (p < 0.05). SIGNIFICANCE: After 5 years, the clinical behavior of the universal adhesive in the etch-and-rinse strategy was better when compared to the self-etch strategy. The use of selective enamel etching is highly recommended for the self-etch strategy. The FDI and USPHS evaluation criteria showed similar results after 5 years.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the five-year clinical performance of Scotchbond Universal Adhesive (SU; 3M Oral Care, St. Paul, MN, USA) in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) using two evaluation criteria. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients participated in this study. Two hundred restorations were assigned to four groups: SU-ERm: etch-and-rinse + moist dentin; SU-ERd: etch-and-rinse + dry dentin; SU-Set: selective enamel etching; and SU-SE: self-etch. A nanofilled composite resin was placed incrementally. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 5 years using both the World Dental Federation (FDI) and the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. The survival rates (retention/fractures) were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier and the log-rank test. For the secondary outcomes, Friedman repeated measures analysis of variance by rank was applied (α = 0.05). RESULTS: After 5 years the recall rate was 86%. The retention/fracture rates were 93% for Erm and ERd, 88.4% for SEet and 81.4% for SE. A significant difference was observed for SE vs. ERd and SE vs. ERm (p = 0.01). Also, marginal discoloration and adaptation showed significant differences with ERm and ERd resulting in fewer marginal discrepancies than SE (p < 0.05). SIGNIFICANCE: After 5 years, the clinical behavior of the universal adhesive in the etch-and-rinse strategy was better when compared to the self-etch strategy. The use of selective enamel etching is highly recommended for the self-etch strategy. The FDI and USPHS evaluation criteria showed similar results after 5 years.
Authors: Akimasa Tsujimoto; Wayne W Barkmeier; Erica C Teixeira; Toshiki Takamizawa; Masashi Miyazaki; Mark A Latta Journal: Jpn Dent Sci Rev Date: 2022-06-25
Authors: Isabel Cristina Celerino de Moraes Porto; Arthur Bezerra de Barros Rocha; Iverson Iago Soares Ferreira; Bruna Muritiba de Barros; Eryck Canabarra Ávila; Matheus Corrêa da Silva; Marcos Paulo Santana de Oliveira; Teresa de Lisieux Guedes Ferreira Lôbo; José Marcos Dos Santos Oliveira; Ticiano Gomes do Nascimento; Jeniffer Mclaine Duarte de Freitas; Johnnatan Duarte de Freitas Journal: Heliyon Date: 2021-02-19
Authors: Wayne W Barkmeier; Akimasa Tsujimoto; Mark A Latta; Toshiki Takamizawa; Scott M Radniecki; Franklin Garcia-Godoy Journal: Eur J Oral Sci Date: 2022-04-22 Impact factor: 2.160
Authors: Louis Hardan; Giovana Orsini; Rim Bourgi; Carlos Enrique Cuevas-Suárez; Marco Nicastro; Florin Lazarescu; Dimitar Filtchev; Elizabeth Cornejo-Ríos; Juan Eliezer Zamarripa-Calderón; Krzysztof Sokolowski; Monika Lukomska-Szymanska Journal: Polymers (Basel) Date: 2022-03-11 Impact factor: 4.329