A three-year clinical evaluation of a one-step self-etch and a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions

Evaluation of a novel restorative protocol to treat non-carious cervical lesion associated with gingival recession: a 2-year follow-up randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare 2 different resin composites and 2 adhesive systems used in a new restorative protocol (partial restoration) to treat non-carious cervical lesions associated with gingival recession type 1 (RT1).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eighty combined defects (CDs) were treated with a partial restoration and periodontal plastic surgery for root coverage. The CDs were randomly assigned to one of the following groups: NP + TE (n = 20), nanofilled composite and 2-step total-etch adhesive system; NP + UA (n = 20), nanofilled composite and universal adhesive system; MH + TE (n = 20), microhybrid composite and 2-step total-etch adhesive; MH + UA (n = 20), microhybrid composite and universal adhesive. Restorations were assessed using the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria at 1 week (baseline) and 6, 12, and 24 months. Survival rate, periodontal parameters, dentin hypersensitivity (DH), and aesthetics were also evaluated.

RESULTS

After 24 months, only the MH + TE group did not lose any restoration, with no significant differences between groups. For surface roughness parameter, MH presented 83.3% of the restorations scoring Bravo, whereas NP presented 48.5% of the restorations scoring Bravo. All groups presented restorations with marginal discoloration. All periodontal parameters behaved similarly, regardless of the restorative material. All groups presented significant reductions of dentin hypersensitivity and improved aesthetic perceptions (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both resin composites and adhesives tested can be combined for partial restorations to treat CDs.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This new restorative-surgical protocol to treat CDs presents satisfactory outcomes. The partial restorations can be successfully executed with both combinations of adhesives and resin composites evaluated in this investigation. TRN : ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT03215615; registration date July 12, 2017.

Clinical Outcomes and Quantitative Margin Analysis of a Universal Adhesive Using a Randomized Clinical Trial over Three Years

The effectiveness of a universal adhesive applied in different application modes for the preparation of Class V composite restorations was evaluated both clinically and by quantitative marginal analysis (QMA). In each of the 22 patients, four non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL) were restored with Filtek^™ Supreme XTE (3M). The adhesive Scotchbond^™ Universal (SBU, 3M) was applied in self-etch (SE), selective-enamel-etch (SEE) or etch-and-rinse (ER) modes. The etch-and-rinse adhesive OptiBond^™ FL (OFL, Kerr) served as a control. The restorations were clinically evaluated (FDI criteria) after 14 days (BL), 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Additionally, QMA was conducted on all restorations of 11 randomly selected patients. The FDI criteria and marginal gap were statistically compared between the groups at each recall as well as for the time periods between recalls. The cumulative failure rate was non-significantly higher in the OFL group when compared to all of the SBU groups. Marginal adaptation in the OFL and SBU-SE/ER groups was significantly decreased (BL-36 m, p: 0.004) in comparison to the SBU-SEE group (BL-36 m, p: 0.063). More marginal gaps were found in the OFL group than in the SBU-SEE (BL to 36 m, p: 0.063-0.003) and SBU-ER (24/36 m, p: 0.066/0.005) groups as well as in the SBU-SE group when compared to the SBU-SEE (12-36 m, p_i ≤ 0.016) and SBU-ER (24/36 m, p: 0.055/0.001) groups. SBU-SEE performed most effectively. The clinical evaluation and QMA corresponded, yet QMA detected group differences earliest after 6 months and is thus a valuable extension to clinical evaluations.

Influence of the volume of restorative material on the concentration of stresses in the restorative interface

Background

To evaluate the microtensile strength in the adhesive interface depending on the volume of the composite resin used to restore class I cavities.

Material and Methods

Forty-eight human third molars received a standardized class I cavity preparation and they were separated into six experimental groups: G1 - single-bottle adhesive system; G2 - bonding system with load; G3 - single-bottle adhesive associated with low-viscosity composite resin; G4 - loaded adhesive associated with low-viscosity composite; G5 - resin-modified glass ionomer associated with single-bottle adhesive; and G6 - resin-modified glass ionomer associated with loaded adhesive. All cavities were restored with a universal restorative composite. After completing the restorations, the samples were stored for seven days in a stove (37°C) and the microtensile bond strength was evaluated by producing slices and applying axial loading in an Instron universal testing machine at a speed of 0.5 mm/min. The thickness of the intermediate layer formed on the cavity floor to verify the relationship between the volume of restorative composite and the concentration of stresses in the buccal wall. With the data obtained in the microtensile strength test, an Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was performed entirely at random.

Results

Duncan's test showed that group 4 (Filtek Flow/Optibond Solo Plus) obtained the highest mean of microtensile strength with no statistically significant difference to groups 3 (Filtek Flow/Single Bond), 5 (Vitremer/Single Bond), and 6 (Vitremer/Optibond Solo Plus). It also showed a statistically significant difference to groups 2 (Optibond Solo Plus) and 1 (Single Bond), with no statistical difference between the other groups studied.

Conclusions

The highest mean of microtensile strength was obtained when the volume of the restorative material decreased through the interposition between the material and the adhesive system of a base with low elasticity modulus. Key words:Adhesion, microtensile, composite resin.

Clinical Performance of Filled/Nanofilled Versus Nonfilled Adhesive Systems in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of filled adhesive systems does not influence the clinical performance of the adhesive restoration in noncarious cervical lesions.

SUMMARY

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

OBJECTIVES

This study compared the clinical performance of two bulk-fill (BF) and one conventional resin composite in a population with a high caries incidence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 138 class I and II restorations were performed and randomly divided into three groups (n = 46) with equal allocation: Filtek BF (FBF; 3M ESPE), Tetric EvoCeram BF (TBF; Ivoclar Vivadent), and control Filtek Z250 (Z250; 3M ESPE). The evaluations were performed using the USPHS and FDI criteria at baseline and after 12 and 36 months by a previously calibrated evaluator. The Friedman and Wilcoxon tests for paired data were used for statistical analysis (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

The DMFT index at baseline was 9.44, with 87% from the decayed component. After 36 months, 108 restorations (n = 36) were evaluated. Two failures were observed for TBF at marginal adaptation and recurrence of caries, resulting in a survival rate of 94.44% and an annual failure rate (AFR) of 1.26%. No equivalence was observed between the criteria for surface roughness, marginal adaptation, and discoloration.

CONCLUSIONS

The 36-month clinical performance of high-viscosity BF resin composites was comparable to conventional incremental-filled resin composites. The FDI criteria better presented the restorations' clinical success. However, in the case of failure, both criteria provided the same result.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

High-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites showed excellent performance after 36 months in a high caries incidence population. It can be considered a simplified alternative restoration method that reduces operating time and minimizes possible operator errors.

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

OBJECTIVES

A network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to assess which adhesive strategy is most clinically effective in treating non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Studies were identified by a systematic search of electronic databases including MEDLINE via PubMed, Brazilian Library in Dentistry (BBO), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database (LILACS), Scopus, and Web of Science without restrictions on publication year or language. The grey literature was also consulted. Only randomized clinical trials that compared different adhesive strategies in NCCLs in adult patients were included. The risk of bias was evaluated by using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. A random-effects Bayesian mixed treatment comparison model was used to compare adhesive strategies (3ER, 2ER, 2SE, and 1SE) at different follow-up times. The surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was estimated for each strategy. Heterogeneity was assessed by using the Cochran Q test and I² statistics. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

A total of 5058 studies were identified, 66 of which met the eligibility criteria and of these 5 were judged "low" risk of bias and 57 were meta-analyzed. We did not observe significant differences in the NMA analysis for any two pairs of adhesives, except for the shortest follow-up for 2ER vs 3ER. The material 2SE ranked highest, although it differed only slightly from the other bonding strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

No bonding strategy is better than the others.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Adhesive efficacy cannot be characterized by its bonding strategy.

Clinical Performance of Bulk-Fill Resin Composite Restorations Using the United States Public Health Service and Federation Dentaire Internationale Criteria: A 12-Month Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective  This study was aimed to compare the 12-month clinical performance of two full-body bulk-fill resin composites Filtek bulk fill/3M ESPE (FBF) and Tetric EvoCeram bulk fill/Ivoclar Vivadent (TBF) and a conventional microhybrid resin composite Filtek Z250/3M ESPE (Z250) using the modified the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) and Federation Dentaire Internationale (FDI) criteria. Also, the agreement between the two evaluation criteria was evaluated at baseline and after 12 months of follow-up.

Materials and Methods  A total of 138 class I and II restorations were placed in posterior teeth (split-mouth design) of 46 volunteers following manufacturer’s instructions and bonded with a self-etching bonding agent (Clear fill SE Bond/Kuraray). The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 12 months of follow-up by three previously calibrated dentists (Cohen’s K = 0.84).

Statistical Analysis  Fisher’s exact test and Pearson’s Chi-squared test were used to evaluating the homogeneity of distribution of the clinical characteristics. Friedman’s test was applied to evaluate differences among the resin composites. The results obtained for the USPHS and FDI criteria at the different observation times were compared using the Wilcoxon test. A level of significance of 0.05 was adopted for all tests.

Results  After 12 months (recall rate, 78.3%, n = 36 patients), the overall success rate was 99.07% for both criteria. Only one failed restoration (0.93%) was detected for each system during follow-up in the TBF group.

Conclusion  The bulk-fill resin composites showed satisfactory clinical performance compared with conventional resin composite after 12 months. The percentage of the acceptable scores was significantly higher for the USPHS criteria, due to discrepancies in the score description for each criterion.

Clinical Efficiency of Self-etching One-Step and Two-Step Adhesives in NCCL: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

One-step self-etch adhesive systems provide a clinical time gain, decreasing the number of clinical steps. When a clinician is able to follow a simpler process of adhesion there is less chance of adhesive failure.

SUMMARY

Objective: A systematic review and meta-analyses were performed to evaluate whether one-step self-etching (1SSE) adhesive systems are as effective as two-step self-etching (2SSE) adhesives in noncarious cervical lesion (NCCL) restorations.Methods: This systematic review was conducted according to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and recorded in the PROSPERO (CRD42018096747). Electronic systematic searches were conducted in the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library for published articles. Only randomized clinical trials that compared 1SSE with 2SSE adhesives systems were selected. The outcomes were retention, postoperative sensitivity, secondary caries, color match, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, and anatomical form.Results: The searches resulted in 476 studies. After applying the eligibility criteria, five randomized controlled trials were selected in which 822 restorations in NCCLs were distributed in 237 patients. The results showed no statistical difference between 1SSE and 2SSE in relation to retention (p=0.23; relative risk [RR]=1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.76, 3.19), postoperative sensitivity ( p=0.50; RR=3.00; 95% CI=0.13, 70.64), Secondary caries (p=0.63; RR=0.68; 95% CI=0.14, 3.31), color match (p=0.41; RR=0.64; 95% CI=0.23, 1.83), marginal discoloration (p=0.93; RR=1.02; 95% CI=0.65, 1.61), and anatomical form (p=0.56; RR=1.38; 95% CI=0.46, 4.13). However there was statistical difference in relation to marginal adaptation ( p=0.01; RR=1.95; 95% CI=1.14, 3.34).Conclusion: This systematic review with meta-analysis revealed that both 1SSE and 2SSE adhesive systems have comparable clinical effectiveness in a follow-up period of 12 to 24 months, except in relation to marginal adaptation.

Does the Type of Solvent in Dental Adhesives Influence the Clinical Performance of Composite Restorations Placed in Noncarious Cervical Lesions? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

According to the clinical and scientific evidence presented in this systematic review and meta-analysis, dental adhesives containing either organic solvent (acetone or alcohol) can be used to achieve similar clinical performance and longevity of composite restorations.

SUMMARY

Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the clinical performance and survival rates of composite restorations placed in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) using dental adhesives containing acetone or alcohol-based solvents.Methods and Materials: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Virtual Health Library (VHL) LILACS, Cochrane Library, OpenGrey, Clinical Trials, and Rebec were searched. MeSH terms, supplementary concepts, synonyms, and free keywords were used in the search strategy. All references were crosschecked by two independent investigators following the PICOS strategy (population, NCCLs; intervention, acetone-based bonding agent; comparison, alcohol-based bonding agent; outcome, clinical evaluation parameters and survival rates; study design, randomized controlled clinical trials). Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to assess risk of bias, and two distinct meta-analyses were performed using the RevMan software. The prevalence of success and the total number of restorations for each group (acetone- or alcohol-based) were used to calculate the risk difference at a confidence interval of 95%. Random-effects models were applied, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 index in the pooled and subgrouped meta-analyses. The certainty of evidence was evaluated through the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.Results: A total of 7876 studies were retrieved, from which 27 studies were selected for the systematic review. Ten studies were classified as "low risk of bias" and included in the meta-analyses. Overall heterogeneity was not significant (I2 = 0.00%). The clinical performance of restorations placed with bonding agents based on both solvents for each of the available parameters presented no statistical significance for any of the meta-analyses (p>0.05).Conclusion: Scientific evidence suggests composite restorations placed with acetone or alcohol-based dental adhesives present similar clinical performance and survival rates in NCCLs.

[Effects of various surface treatments on the bonding efficacy of noncarious cervical sclerotic lesions]

Noncarious cervical sclerotic lesions (NCSL) are dental cervical lesions with noncarious sclerotic dentine (NCSD), which appears smooth, hard, and either light yellow or dark brown. Most NCSLs are wedge or dish shaped and commonly occur in canines and premolars, leading to dental hypersensitivity and aesthetic defect. The principal treatment is composite resin restoration; however, many clinical problems, such as retention loss, should not be ignored. NCSL's bonding interface includes NCSD and enamel, and interface pre-treatment can promote the bonding effect. This review summarizes current surface treatment methods and their influence on the bonding effectiveness of NCSL to provide guidance for clinical practice.

Evaluation of low-viscosity bulk-fill composites regarding marginal and internal adaptation

This study aimed at evaluating the marginal and internal adaptation of low-viscosity bulk-fill composites to enamel and dentin using a self-etch or an etch-and-rinse adhesive without and with artificial ageing. Hundred and twenty-eight MOD cavities in extracted molars were assigned to eight groups (n = 16), restored with the adhesives OptiBond FL (OFL) or Xeno V+ (X) and two low-viscosity bulk-fill composites SDR or x-tra base, covered with Premise. Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill and Premise served as a control. n = 8 per group were subjected to prolonged water storage (180 days) and thermocycling (2500×). Scanning electron microscopy was used to determine marginal gaps (MG) and interfacial adhesive defects (IAD). There were no significant differences between composite types in 44 out of 48 (MG) or 43/48 (IAD) comparisons. More MG were observed with X than with OFL (14 out of 16 comparisons, two significant), while in 16 of 16 comparisons with X more IAD were observed (14 significant). After artificial ageing, MG generally increased (9/16 significant), compared to IAD (one significant). The performance of the investigated composite types concerning the integrity of the tooth-composites interface was comparable. Compared to the 1-step self-etch system, the bond with the 3-step etch-and-rinse adhesive was raised.

Influence of Bulk-fill Restoration on Polymerization Shrinkage Stress and Marginal Gap Formation in Class V Restorations

Clinical Relevance

Restoring Class V cavities with a regular bulk-fill composite presents a more favorable biomechanical behavior than restoring with a regular nano-filled composite.

SUMMARY

Purpose:

This study evaluated the influence of Class V cavity extension and restorative material on the marginal gap formation, before and after aging, and the theoretical polymerization shrinkage stress distribution in a tooth restoration.

Methods and Materials:

Class V cavities with the depth of 2 mm, cervical/incisal distance of 4 mm, and margins located in the enamel 1 mm above the cementoenamel junction were prepared in 60 bovine incisors in two mesiodistal dimensions (n=30): 2.9-mm large extension cavities (LE) or 1.4-mm small extension cavities (SE). The cavities' depths were validated using a periodontal probe, while the mesiodistal and cervical/incisal distances were measured using a stereomicroscope. After adhesive application (Clearfil SE Bond), each group was randomly divided into two groups (n=15) according to the restorative material: Filtek Z350 XT (N) or Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior (BF). The marginal gap formation between the tooth structure and the restorative material was evaluated using a stereomicroscope before and after thermocycling for 15,000 cycles (5°C and 55°C). Data were analyzed using repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey test for multiple comparisons (α=0.05). A three-dimensional geometric model with the same dimensions as the experimental test was created for each cavity, and the restorations were modeled for each restorative material. In the analysis software, the finite element mesh was created with tetrahedral quadratic elements, and the polymerization shrinkage was simulated by thermal analogy. The maximum principal stress was used to express the tensile stress in the adhesive interface through colorimetric graphs.

Results:

For the marginal gap, the repeated-measures ANOVA revealed a significant effect only for the factors composite resin (df=1, F=4.09, p=0.04) and thermal aging (df=1, F=44.35, p&lt;0.001). For all numerical simulations, higher stress concentration occurred at the enamel margin, and the stress peak decreased in the following sequence: LE-N (17.0 MPa) &gt; SE-N (15.0 MPa) &gt; LE-BF (9.1 MPa) &gt; SE-BF (8.2 MPa).

Conclusion:

Marginal gaps in the specimens fell between approximately 12 and 17 μm; however, the regular bulk-fill composite showed less gap formation and better stress distribution around the cavity margin than the regular nano-filled composite, regardless of the cavity extension.

Do Tooth- and Cavity-related Aspects of Noncarious Cervical Lesions Affect the Retention of Resin Composite Restorations in Adults? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis based on the following research question: do tooth- and cavity-related aspects of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) affect the retention of composite restorations?

METHODS

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the retention rate of resin restorations in NCCLs were included for the identification and comparison of their characteristics. The search was conducted in PubMed and adapted for Scopus, Web of Science, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database (LILACS), Brazilian Library in Dentistry (BBO), Cochrane Library, and System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe (SIGLE) without restrictions until July 2018. Unpublished and ongoing trial registries were also searched. The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used for assessing risk of bias. The quality of the evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations: Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Using the random effects model, a meta-analysis was conducted for each aspect (arch distribution, tooth location, wear facets, dentin sclerosis, shape, size, depth, occluso-gingival distance, and margin location).

RESULTS

We retrieved 6738 articles. After removal of duplicates and nonrelevant articles, 24 RCTs remained. The anterior tooth location favored the retention rates of restoration of NCCLs (relative risk [RR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.16). The presence of wear facets is a risk factor for the retention of restorations (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83-0.99). The evidence was moderate for arch distribution and low or very low for all other factors because of heterogeneity, imprecision, and inconsistency.

CONCLUSION

The tooth location and the presence of wear facets can affect the retention of composite resins in NCCLs.

Clinical Evaluation of Noncarious Cervical Lesions of Different Extensions Restored With Bulk-fill or Conventional Resin Composite: Preliminary Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

This randomized clinical trial evaluated the influence of the occlusogingival distance (OGD) of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) on the clinical performance of a regular bulk-fill resin composite and a regular nanofilled resin composite.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 140 restorations were randomly placed in 77 participants by one operator. NCCLs were divided into four groups (n=35) according to OGD (1.5 mm±10% or 3 mm±10%) and resin composites (Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior [B] or Filtek Z350 XT [C]) used: 1.5 mm-B, 1.5 mm-C, 3 mm-B, and 3 mm-C. A two-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond) was applied following manufacturer instructions in all restorative procedures. Restorations were polished 1 week after placement. Clinical evaluation was performed at baseline (7 days), 6 months, and 1 year by two calibrated examiners, according to the modified US Public Health Service criteria evaluating fractures/retention, marginal staining, marginal adaptation, recurrence of caries, anatomic form, postoperative sensitivity, and surface texture. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for intergroup comparison in each follow-up; the Friedman analysis of variance, followed by the least significant difference test (multiple comparisons) was used for intragroup comparison between baseline and follow-up times (α=0.05).

RESULTS

Two restorations were lost at 12 months (1 for 1.5 mm-B and 1 for 3 mm-B). The retention rates at 12 months were 100% for 1.5 mm-C, 97% for 1.5 mm-B, 100% for 3 mm-C; and 97% for 3 mm-B, with no statistical difference among the groups (p=0.570). At 12 months, a statistically significant difference was found among the follow-up times for the same group (1.5 mm-B, 1.5 mm-C, and 3 mm-B) regarding the marginal staining criterion; moreover, the 3 mm-C group showed a significant difference from 6 months. No significant difference was found for the other parameters.

CONCLUSION

Both resin composites showed acceptable clinical performance, and the OGD of NCCLs did not influence the clinical performance of resin composite restorations after 12 months.

Randomized clinical trial of four adhesion strategies: A 42 month study

Context

The adhesives clinical effectiveness has been extensively reported for noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs). However, there is a lack of information about the adhesive systems strategies and their effect on NCCL restoration longevity.

Aims

This study aims to evaluate a 42-month performance of four dentin adhesive systems used for the restorative treatment of NCCLs.

Settings and Design

NCCLs were randomly divided into four groups: (1) Scotchbond multi-purpose (MP); 2: Single bond plus (SB); 3: Scotchbond SE (SE); and 4: Easy bond (EB).

Subjects and Methods

NCCLs (125) were randomly distributed: (1) MP; (2) SB; (3) SE; and (4) EB and were restored with a nanofilled resin-composite, evaluated along 18-36-42 months.

Statistical Analysis Used

Kruskal-Wallis test: Comparison among the adhesive systems in each period. Friedman analysis: Comparison along the periods. Kaplan-Meier: Survival analysis.

Results

Baseline and 42-month retention (RET) rates (%) were 100/100 for MP; 100/94.74 for SB; 100/87.5 for SE; and 100/100 for EB. The cumulative failure percentage was 9.52% for MP, 9.52% SB, 15.8% SE, and 10% EB. Restorations survival was not dependent on the used adhesive type. Marginal adaptation (MA) was similar to each group, but EB presented noticeable marginal deterioration. Wear was noticed in the 3-step etch-and-rinse (MP) restorations evaluated after 42 months. For the EB, baseline and 18-month wear evaluation were statistically similar. After 36 and 42 months, wear was also similar for EB.

Conclusions

Adhesive systems showed similar performance within most important adhesive bonding efficiency achievement parameters: RET, MA, interfacial staining, recurrent caries, and postoperative sensitivity evaluated during 42 months.

Is Optical Coherence Tomography a Potential Tool to Evaluate Marginal Adaptation of Class III/IV Composite Restorations In Vivo?

OBJECTIVE

Margin analysis of Class III and IV composite restorations in vitro and in vivo occurred by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and optical coherence tomography (OCT). The results were compared and related to clinical evaluation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eight Class III composite restorations were imaged in vitro using OCT and SEM. The margins were analyzed quantitatively. OCT signals were verified by assignment to the criteria perfect margin, gap, and positive/negative ledge. In vivo quantitative margin analysis of Class III/IV composite restorations made of the micro-hybrid composite Venus combined with the self-etch adhesive iBond Gluma inside (1-SE) or etch-and-rinse adhesive Gluma Comfort Bond (2-ER) (all Heraeus Kulzer) was carried out using OCT and SEM after 90 months of clinical function. The results were compared with clinical evaluation (US Public Health Service criteria; marginal integrity, marginal discoloration).

RESULTS

In vitro, the correlation between OCT and SEM was high for all four margin criteria (Kendall tau b [τ_b] correlation: 0.64-0.92, p_i≤0.026), with no significant differences between OCT and SEM (p_i≥0.63). In vivo, a moderate correlation was observed (τ_b: 0.38-0.45, p_i<0.016). Clinically, the cumulative failure rate in the criterion marginal integrity was higher for the 1-SE group (baseline 90 M, p=0.011). Similarly, OCT and SEM detected higher percentages of the criterion gap in the 1-SE group (p: 0.027/0.002), in contrast to perfect margin. Both, gap and perfect margin ranged widely between 0.0% and 88.7% (OCT) and between 0.0% and 89.0% (SEM).

CONCLUSION

Despite the positive selection bias after 90 months with only a few patients left, quantitative margin analysis allows for differentiation between the two adhesives at this specific date. OCT in particular offers the possibility to evaluate marginal integrity directly in vivo.

Clinical Effectiveness of Different Polishing Systems and Self-Etch Adhesives in Class V Composite Resin Restorations: Two-Year Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

The aim of this randomized controlled clinical trial was to compare the clinical effectiveness of different polishing systems and self-etch adhesives in class V composite resin restorations. A total of 164 noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) from 35 patients were randomly allocated to one of four experimental groups, each of which used a combination of polishing systems and adhesives. The two polishing systems used were Sof-Lex XT (Sof), a multistep abrasive disc, and Enhance/Pogo (EP), a simplified abrasive-impregnated rubber instrument. The adhesive systems were Clearfil SE bond (CS), a two-step self-etch adhesive, and Xeno V (XE), a one-step self-etch adhesive. All NCCLs were restored with light-cured microhybrid resin composites (Z250). Restorations were evaluated at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months by two blinded independent examiners using modified FDI criteria. The Fisher exact test and generalized estimating equation analysis considering repeated measurements were performed to compare the outcomes between the polishing systems and adhesives. Three restorations were dislodged: two in CS/Sof and one in CS/EP. None of the restorations required any repair or retreatment except those showing retention loss. Sof was superior to EP with regard to surface luster, staining, and marginal adaptation (p<0.05). CS and XE did not show differences in any criteria (p>0.05). Sof is clinically superior to EP for polishing performance in class V composite resin restoration. XE demonstrates clinically equivalent bonding performance to CS.

OCT for early quality evaluation of tooth-composite bond in clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate early quality of composite restorations with a universal adhesive in different application modes clinically and with optical coherence tomography (OCT).

METHODS

22 patients with four non-carious cervical lesions each received composite restorations (Filtek Supreme^™ XTE, 3 M). The universal adhesive Scotchbond Universal^™(SBU, 3 M) was applied with three etching protocols: self-etch (SE), selective-enamel-etch (SEE) and etch-and-rinse (ER). The etch-and-rinse adhesive OptiBond^™ FL (OFL, Kerr) served as a control. Restorations were imaged by OCT (Thorlabs) directly after application (t₀). After 14 days (t₁) and 6 month (t₂) OCT imaging (interfacial adhesive defects) was repeated combined with clinical assessment (FDI criteria). Groups were compared by Friedman-/Wilcoxon- and McNemar-Test.

RESULTS

No differences were seen clinically between groups (p_i ≥ 0.500). OCT assessment revealed more adhesive defects at the enamel interface with SBU/SE at t_0-t₂ compared to all groups (p_i ≤ 0.016). OFL showed more defects than SBU/ER (t₁: p = 0.01; t₂: p = 0.083). At dentin/cementum interface OFL exhibited more adhesive defects than SBU with all conditioning modes (t₀, t₁, p_i ≤ 0.003) and at t₂ to SBU/SE and SBU/ER (p < 0.001). Since t₁ defects with SBU were detected more frequently in the SE and SEE modes compared to ER (p_i ≤ 0.037). In contrast to SBU defects increased with OFL up to t₂ (p_i ≤ 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to clinical evaluation, OCT revealed subtle adhesive defects directly after application that might interfere with clinical success. It was demonstrated that ER does not decrease initial adhesion of SBU to dentin.

Clinical Effectiveness of a Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement and a Mild One-step Self-etch Adhesive Applied Actively and Passively in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: An 18-Month Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVES:

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of two methods of application of a mild one-step self-etch adhesive and composite resin as compared with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) control restoration in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs).

METHODS:

A total of 294 restorations were placed in 56 patients, 98 in each one of the following groups: 1) G-Bond active application combined with Solare-X composite resin (A-1SEA), 2) G-Bond passive application combined with Solare-X composite resin (P-1SEA), and 3) GC II LC RMGIC. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after six, 12, and 18 months according to the FDI criteria for fractures/retention, marginal adaptation, marginal staining, postoperative sensitivity, and secondary caries. Cumulative failure rates were calculated for each criterion at each recall period. The effect of adhesive, method of application, and recall period were assessed. The Kruskal-Wallis test for intergroup comparison and Friedman and Wilcoxon signed ranks tests for intragroup comparison were used for each criterion ( α=0.05).

RESULTS:

The retention rates at 18 months were 93.26% for the A-1SEA group, 86.21% for the P-1SEA group, and 90.91% for the RMGIC group. The active application improved the retention rates compared with the passive application of mild one-step self-etch adhesive; however, no statistically significant difference was observed between the groups. Marginal staining was observed in 13 restorations (1 in A-1SEA, 4 in P-1SEA, and 8 in RMGIC) with no significant difference between the groups. The RMGIC group showed a significant increase in marginal staining at 12 and 18 months from the baseline. There was no significant difference between the groups for marginal adaptation, secondary caries, or postoperative sensitivity.

CONCLUSION:

Within the limitations of the study, we can conclude that mild one-step self-etch adhesive followed by a resin composite restoration can be an alternative to RMGIC with similar retention and improved esthetics in restoration of NCCLs. Agitation could possibly benefit the clinical performance of mild one-step self-etch adhesives, but this study did not confirm that the observed benefit was statistically significant.

Compliance of Randomized Clinical Trials in Noncarious Cervical Lesions With the CONSORT Statement: A Systematic Review of Methodology

The literature was reviewed to evaluate the compliance of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with the CONsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT ) and the risk of bias of these studies through the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool (CCRT). RCTs were searched at Cochrane Library, PubMed, and other electronic databases to find studies about adhesive systems for cervical lesions. The compliance of the articles with CONSORT was evaluated using the following scale: 0 = no description, 1 = poor description, and 2 = adequate description. Descriptive analyses about the number of studies by journal, follow-up period, country, and quality assessments were performed with CCRT for assessing risk of bias in RCTs. One hundred thirty-eight RCTs were left for assessment. More than 30% of the studies received scores of 0 or 1. Flow chart, effect size, allocation concealment, and sample size were more critical items, with 80% receiving a score of 0. The overall CONSORT score for the included studies was 15.0 ± 4.8 points, which represents 46.9% of the maximum CONSORT score. A significant difference among countries was observed (p&lt;0.001), as well as range of year (p&lt;0.001). Only 4.3% of the studies were judged as at low risk; 36.2% were classified as having unclear risk and 59.4% as having high risk of bias. The adherence of RCTs evaluating adhesive systems to the CONSORT is low with unclear/high risk of bias.

Evaluation of the effect of different post materials and adhesive systems on the bonding strength of short-post technique for primary teeth

BACKGROUND

The most important process in treating grossly decayed teeth, including decay in the pulp, is the ability to hold a retainer in for a short time.

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the bond strengths of different adhesive systems and post materials on primary teeth.

DESIGN

One hundred and twenty extracted maxillar primary central incisor teeth were randomly divided into two main groups (total-etch and self-etch adhesive systems) and five subgroups (1: control-nanohybrid composite resin, 2: pre-impregnated glass fiber, 3: unsaturated glass fiber, 4: polyethylene fiber, 5: short-fiber reinforced composite resin). The push-out test was performed using a universal testing machine with a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was detected between the two different adhesive systems and five different materials in terms of the maximum values measured for fractures in the specimens when both the adhesive materials and the short-post materials were evaluated separately (P > 0.05). However, as a result of multiple comparisons made, it was found that statistical differences between the groups applying the total-etch adhesive system occurred in Groups 3 and 5. The highest push-out test values were measured in Group 5 and Group 1, and the lowest value in Group 3. Although the fracture type distribution in the total-etch adhesive system groups was not statistically different based on the material used (χ²  = 11,865; P = 0.309), the self-etch adhesive systems did show differences (χ²  = 28,463; P < 0.001). Both the total-etch and the self-etch adhesive system groups showed mostly adhesive failures.

CONCLUSION

The fiber-reinforced and nanohybrid composite resin had higher values in the short-post technique, and there was no significant difference between the different fiber posts.

Influence of adhesive strategy on clinical parameters in cervical restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to answer the following PICO question: "Is the risk of postoperative sensitivity (POS), retention rates and marginal discoloration of composite restorations [CR] bonded with self-etch (SE) in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) of adults equals to etch-and-rinse (ER) adhesives?".

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed in May 2016 in the MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, BBO and Cochrane Library and SIGLE, abstracts of IADR, unpublished and ongoing trials registries, dissertations and theses without restrictions. Only randomized clinical trials that compared composite resin restorations placed with self-etch and etch-and-rinse in NCCLs were included. After removal of duplicates and non-eligible articles, 50 articles from 42 studies (follow-ups of the same study were merged) remained for synthesis of the risk of bias (Cochrane Risk of bias tool).

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were at "high" risk of bias, yielding 29 studies for meta-analysis. No difference on the POS after restoration placement (risk ratio [RR] 1.04; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.34) as well as in the retention rates for all follow-up periods was observed. The etch-and-rinse approach produced less marginal discoloration at 18 months to 2 years (RR 1.51; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.90) and at 4 to 5 years (RR 1.81; 95% CI 1.28 to 2.55) (p<0.0007).

CONCLUSIONS

The adhesive strategy did not influence the POS and the retention rates of composite resin in NCCLs in any of the follow-up periods; but less marginal discoloration was found in etch-and-rinse adhesives.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Composite resin restorations placed with self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesives produce restoration with the similar clinical service and POS, however using etch-and-rinse adhesives one can reduce marginal discoloration. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015019533.

Six-year clinical performance of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the 6-year clinical performance of Xeno IV, Xeno III, and XP Bond adhesives in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs).

METHODS

This was a randomized controlled clinical trial where 39 participants met the inclusion/exclusion criteria and were enrolled. Lesions restored were notch-shaped NCCLs. Prior to adhesive procedures, NCCLs were roughened. No enamel bevel was placed and no mechanical retention was created. Adhesive systems were applied following manufacturer's instructions and the NCCLs were restored with composite resin (TPH(3)). Restorations were finished immediately after placement and scored with regard to retention, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, sensitivity, and secondary caries using modified USPHS criteria. Descriptive statistics were performed. Logistic regression models were performed for each outcome separately with compound symmetry correlation structure where teeth were clustered by participants. All analyses were conducted using SAS 9.2.

RESULTS

The 6-year recall rate was 77.5% of the restorations (76.9% of the participants). No statistical differences were found between adhesives for retention, marginal discoloration, and marginal adaptation. Restorations failed by loss of retention (16.7%, 27.6%, and 11.8% of Xeno IV, Xeno III, and XP Bond restorations, respectively) and marginal discoloration (7.4% of Xeno IV restorations). For every unit increase in restoration volume it was 1.31 (95%C.I. 1.05, 1.63, P=0.01) times more likely that the restoration retention would be maintained.

SIGNIFICANCE

The tested adhesive systems presented similar clinical performance after six years of service, with annual failure rates of 2.8%, 4.6%, and 2.0% for Xeno IV, Xeno III, and XP Bond, respectively.