Clinical evaluation of different adhesives used in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: 24-month results

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.

Rethinking the decision-making process to treat gingival recession associated with non-carious cervical lesions

The presence of a tooth-surface defect, such as a non-carious cervical lesion (NCCL), associated with sites of gingival recession (GR) defects creates a combined soft tissue/tooth defect (CD) that requires a different treatment plan. This study aimed to critically review the literature regarding the available treatment protocols for CDs and suggest a new decision-making process. NCCLs were classified as Class A-: the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) was visible and the root surface discrepancy was < 0.5 mm (no step); Class A+: CEJ was visible and the root surface discrepancy was > 0.5 mm (with a step); Class B-: unidentifiable CEJ without a step; Class B+: unidentifiable CEJ with a step. NCCLs affecting both root and crown surfaces (Class B) lead to CEJ destruction and consequently eliminate an important landmark used before and after root coverage procedures. The depth of the root surface discrepancy is vital owing to its possible impact on soft tissue adaptation after healing, which, in turn, may influence the treatment options, namely the use of graft and/or composites to compensate for the discrepancy. Clinically, a step with horizontal depth greater than 0.5 mm should be recognized as the minimum threshold value to define this condition. Extremely deep defects tend to assume a V-shaped topography. Therefore, extremely deep V-shaped defects were classified into subclasses A+V, a V-shaped defect, and B+V, a V-shaped defect with loss of CEJ, for management considerations. The treatment options, supported by the literature, and a decision-making process to deal with each condition are presented.

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

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.

Effect of Different Application Techniques of Universal Bonding System on Microtensile Bond Strength of Bulk-Fill Composites to Primary and Permanent Dentin

Objectives

This study aimed to determine the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of a bulk-fill composite to permanent and primary coronal dentin using a universal adhesive in self-etch and total-etch modes.

Materials and Methods

This in-vitro study was performed on 52 occlusal dentinal surfaces of human primary and permanent teeth. The crowns were cut to the gingival level. The 48 prepared dentin sections were randomly assigned to the following groups (n=13): A: Primary/Total-etch, B: Primary/Self-etch, C: Permanent/Total-etch, and D: Permanent/Self-etch. In groups A and C, after etching for 15 seconds, two layers of a universal bonding (Futurabond U) were applied and cured for 10 seconds. All samples were filled with a bulk-fill composite (x-trafil; VOCO) and cured for 40 seconds. The samples were cut to a bar-shaped dentin block with the dimensions of 1×1×1 mm³, and after 10,000 thermocycles, the μTBS test was accomplished at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/minute. The mean and standard deviation (SD) of μTBS were calculated, and the data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Fisher's exact test.

Results

The mean μTBS was as follows: A: 15.03±2.0279, B: 11.11±2.4423, C: 23.50±4.8165, and D: 16.26±6.3200 MPa. Futurabond U showed a higher μTBS in the total-etch mode (P<0.001). The permanent teeth had greater μTBS than the primary teeth (P<0.001). Similar percentages of failure modes were observed in the total-etch groups but in the self-etch groups, most failures were in the form of adhesive and mixed.

Conclusion

Greater μTBS was observed in the permanent teeth with the total-etch technique.

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.

Microshear Bond Strength of Different Adhesive Systems to Dentin

Objectives:

The aim of this study was to compare the microshear bond strength (μSBS) of various adhesive systems to dentin.

Materials and Methods:

In this in vitro experimental study, 60 sound human third molars were divided into four groups. Dentin discs were prepared of middle-third dentin measuring 4 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness. Dentin surfaces were bonded with one of the four types of adhesives: (A) Single Bond (3M ESPE), Scotchbond Universal (3M ESPE) in etch and rinse (B) and self-etch (C) modes and (D) Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray Noritake Dental). After the application of adhesive systems according to the manufacturers’ instructions, composite cylinders (Vit-l-escence) were bonded to dentin surfaces. The μSBS test was performed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test (α=0.05).

Results:

The μSBS was the highest in self-etch Scotchbond Universal (15.8±6.08 MPa) followed by Clearfil SE Bond (15.24±4.6 MPa), etch and rinse Scotchbond Universal (11.68±4.07MPa) and Single Bond (11.24±3.74 MPa). A significant difference was only found between Single Bond and etch and rinse Scotchbond Universal groups (P=0.04).

Conclusion:

Based on the results of this study, application of Scotchbond Universal in self-etch mode provides a reliable bond to dentin.

Finite Element Analysis in Setting of Fillings of V-Shaped Tooth Defects Made with Glass-Ionomer Cement and Flowable Composite

The aim of the present paper is to investigate the deformation–stress state of fillings of V-shaped tooth defects by finite element analysis (FEA). Two different materials are used—auto-cured resin-reinforced glass-ionomer cement (GIC) and flowable photo-cured composite (FPC). Two materials are placed into the cavity in one portion, as before the application of the composite the cavity walls are covered with a thin adhesive layer. Deformations and equivalent von Mises stresses are evaluated by FEA. Experimental study of micro-leakage is performed. It is established that there is an analogous non-homogeneous distribution of equivalent Von Mises stresses at fillings of V-shaped defects, made with GIC and FPC. Maximum stresses are generated along the boundaries of the filling on the vestibular surface of the tooth and at the bottom of the filling itself. Values of equivalent Von Mises stresses of GIC fillings are higher than that of FPC. Magnitude and character of deformation distribution at GIC and FPC fillings are similar—deformation is maximum along the vestibular surface of the filling and is 0.056 and 0.053 mm, respectively. In FPC fillings, the adhesive layer, located along the cavity/filling boundary, is characterized with greatest strain. The experimental study of micro-leakage has confirmed the adequacy of models used in FEA.

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.

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.

Classification review of dental adhesive systems: from the IV generation to the universal type

Adhesive dentistry has undergone great progress in the last decades. In light of minimal-invasive dentistry, this new approach promotes a more conservative cavity design, which relies on the effectiveness of current enamel-dentine adhesives. Adhesive dentistry began in 1955 by Buonocore on the benefits of acid etching. With changing technologies, dental adhesives have evolved from no-etch to total-etch (4^th and 5^th generation) to self-etch (6^th, 7^th and 8^th generation) systems. Currently, bonding to dental substrates is based on three different strategies: 1) etch-and-rinse, 2) self-etch and 3) resin-modified glass-ionomer approach as possessing the unique properties of self-adherence to the tooth tissue. More recently, a new family of dentin adhesives has been introduced (universal or multi-mode adhesives), which may be used either as etch-and-rinse or as self-etch adhesives. The purpose of this article is to review the literature on the current knowledge for each adhesive system according to their classification that have been advocated by many authorities in most operative/restorative procedures. As noted by several valuable studies that have contributed to understanding of bonding to various substrates helps clinicians to choose the appropriate dentin bonding agents for optimal clinical outcomes.

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.