A New Dual-cure Universal Simplified Adhesive: 18-month Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial

Clinical performance of preheating thermoviscous composite resin for non-carious cervical lesions restoration: A 24-month randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

This 24-month, double-blind, split-mouth randomized clinical trial aimed to compare the retention rates of a preheated thermoviscous composite resin (PHT) compared to a non-heated composite resin (NHT) in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs).

METHODS

A total of 120 restorations were restored on NCCLs using a preheated (VisCalor bulk, Voco GmbH) and a non-heated (Admira Fusion, Voco GmbH) composite resins with 60 restorations per group. A universal adhesive in the selective enamel conditioning was applied. In the PHT group, composite was heated at 68 °C for using a bench heater. In the NHT group, no heating was employed. Both restorative materials were dispensed into caps and inserted into the NCCLs. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, 18, and after 24 months of clinical service using the FDI criteria. Statistical analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier estimation analysis for retention/fracture rate and Chi-square test for the other FDI parameters (α=0.05).

RESULTS

After 24 months 108 restorations were assessed. Seven restorations were lost (two for PHT group and five for NHT group), and the retention rates (95 % confidence interval [CI]) were 96.7 % (81.5-99.9) for PHT group and 90.8 % (81.1-96.0) for NHT group, with no statistical differences between them (p > 0.05). The hazard ratio (95 % CI) was 0.52 (0.27 to 1.01), with no significant difference within groups. In terms of all other FDI parameters that were assessed, all restorations were deemed clinically acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

Both composites showed high rates of retention rates after 24 months.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The clinical performance of the new preheated thermoviscous was found to be as good as the non-heated composite after 24-month of clinical evaluation in non-carious cervical lesions.

REGISTRATION OF CLINICAL TRIALS

RBR-6d6gxxz.

Various ways of pre-heating a bulk-fill thermoviscous composite in restoration in non-carious cervical lesions: 12-month randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study is to evaluate through a randomized clinical trial the best method to preheat a composite resin, if using a Caps dispenser device associated with Caps Warmer (CD) or with a VisCalor Caps dispenser/warmer (VD) for restorations in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

One hundred and twenty restorations were distributed to two groups (n = 60) according to the pre-heating way of thermoviscous bulk-fill composite resin. For the CD group, pre-heating was carried at 68 °C using a heating bench for 3 min. For the VD group, pre-heating was performed at 68 °C using a heating gun for 30 s. After that, pre-heated bulk-fill composites were directly inserted in the NCCLs. The total working time was recorded. The restorations were evaluated after 6 and 12 months of clinical performance according to the FDI criteria. Statistical analysis was performed using the Student's t test for unpaired samples for working time, and the Chi-square test for restoration clinical performance (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Working time was shorter for VD with a statistically significant difference compared to CD (p = 0.01). Few restorations were lost or fractured after 12 months of clinical evaluation (p > 0.05). The retention rates were 96.7% (CI 95 %: 88.6-99.1%) for CD and 98.3% (CI 95 %: 91.1-99.7%) for VD. The other FDI parameters were considered clinically acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

The different pre-heating ways did not influence the clinical performance of thermoviscous bulk-fill composite restorations in NCCLs after 12 months.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Regardless of the bulk-fill thermoviscous composite resin pre-heating ways, the restorations are clinically acceptable after 12 months.

Five-year clinical evaluation of universal adhesive applied following different bonding techniques: A randomized multicenter clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical performance of a universal adhesive system (Futurabond U, Voco) when applied following different adhesive strategies in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) after 5 years.

METHODS

Fifty participants were included. Futurabond U (Voco) was applied in NCCLs using four adhesive strategies (n = 50 each): only self-etch (SE); selective enamel etching + self-etch (SET + SE); etch-and-rinse with dry dentin (ERD); and etch-and-rinse with wet dentin (ERW). All cavities were restored with Admira Fusion composite resin (Voco). Restorations were evaluated after 1, 3, and 5 years using the World Federation criteria (FDI) and the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria.

RESULTS

After 5 years, retention rates were 81 % (65.8-90.5) for SE, 87 % (73.2-94.4) for SET + SE, 84 % (69.6-92.6) for ERD, and 78 % (63.6-88.9) for ERW (p > 0.05). Thirty-five restorations were considered to have minor discrepancies in marginal adaptation at the 5-year recall (14 for SE, 9 for SET + SE, 6 for ERD, and 6 for ERW; p > 0.05). Sixteen restorations were detected as a minor marginal discoloration (6 for SE, 4 for SET + SE, 1 for ERD, and 5 for ERW; p > 0.05) and one restoration showed a recurrence of caries (1 for ERW; p > 0.05) at the 5-year recall. No restorations showed postoperative sensitivity after 5 years.

SIGNIFICANCE

NCCLs restorations using a universal adhesive showed satisfactory clinical performance after 5 years, regardless of the adhesive strategy.

Effect of adhesive strategy of universal adhesives in noncarious cervical lesions - an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of adhesive strategy (total etch or self-etch) of universal adhesives in non-carious cervical lesions.

DATA SOURCE

A search was made in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, Web Of Science, Open Gray, Clinical Registries.

DATA SELECTION

Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials, studies on non-carious cervical lesions restored using Universal Adhesives, and studies in which universal adhesives have been used in total etch and self -etch strategies were included in this systematic review.

DATA EXTRACTION

A total of 17 articles were included in the systematic review and 13 in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was conducted to assess the clinical performance of NCCLs in terms of retention, marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, secondary caries and post-operative sensitivity at 18, 24, 36 month follow-up using USPHS as well as FDI criteria, separately.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Overall there was no significant difference between total etch and self etch adhesive strategies for any of the five outcome measures using either the FDI or the USPHS criteria. p > 0.05, 95% CI, I² value of 0%. A strongly suspected publication bias in the retention domain was seen at 18 month follow up under FDI criteria.

CONCLUSION

Most universal adhesives show acceptable clinical performance. There is no significant effect of the adhesive strategy of universal adhesives on their clinical performance according to the results of our meta-analysis.

Can composite packaging and selective enamel etching affect the clinical behavior of bulk-fill composite resin in posterior restorations? 24-month results of a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

This is a double-blind, split-mouth, randomized clinical study that aims to evaluate the influence of bulk-fill composite packaging presented in syringes (BSy) and capsules (BCa), and the effect of selective enamel etching (SEE) on the clinical performance of class I and II bulk-fill resin composite restorations after 24 months.

METHODOLOGY

A total of 295 class I or class II restorations were performed on 70 patients. One universal adhesive was applied in all restorations. SEE was used in 148 restorations and self-etching mode (SET) in 147 restorations. After the adhesive application, cavities were restored with Filtek Bulk-fill Posterior Restorative in syringes (BSy), Filtek One Bulk-fill in capsules (BCa), or Filtek Supreme Ultra in syringes with the incremental technique (In). All restorations were evaluated using the FDI criteria after one week and after six, 12, and 24 months. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Pearson's Chi-square test were used (α=0.05) for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

After 24 months, 62 patients were evaluated and four restorations were lost due to fracture (one for SEEBSy, two for SEEIn, and one for SETIn). No significant differences in the fracture and retention rate were found between groups (p>0.05). SEE showed significantly fewer marginal adaptation defects than SET (p<0.05). BCa and BSy groups showed fewer marginal discrepancies compared to In (p<0.05). Restorations performed with BCa showed less color mismatch than BSy or In (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Although all restorations exhibited satisfactory clinical performance after 24 months of clinical service, the clinical behavior of class I and II restorations' improved when performed with a bulk-fill composite in capsules, mainly when associated with a universal adhesive applied with SEE.

Efficacy of adhesive strategies for restorative dentistry: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials over 12 months of follow-up

PURPOSE

The efficacy of etch-and-rinse, selective enamel-etching, and self-etching protocols for universal adhesives in follow-ups of over 12 months was compared in a network meta-analysis.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 1998 to 2022 that compared marginal staining, marginal adaptation, retention and fractures, post-operative sensitivity, or recurrence of caries that took place over 12-months post-restoration were selected. A network meta-analysis determined the performance of each adhesive protocol.

RESULTS

After screening 981 articles, 16 RCTs were subjected to data extraction. Of which, 674 patients with 2816 restorations, were included in the network meta-analysis. The pooled risk of marginal discoloration following self-etching was significantly higher than that following etch-and-rinse at over 12, 24, and 36 months, which was time-dependent. The pooled risks of unfavorable marginal adaptation and unfavorable retention and fractures following self-etching were also significantly higher than that following etch-and-rinse, with the rates of unfavorable retention and fractures in non-carious cervical lesions increasing in a time-dependent manner. The pooled risks of marginal discoloration, unfavorable marginal adaptation, retention and fractures were similar between etch-and-rinse and selective enamel-etching protocols. Post-operative hypersensitivity and recurrence of caries were not significantly different among etch-and-rinse, selective enamel-etching, and self-etching protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

In follow-ups over 12 months, esthetic and functional outcomes of restorations completed with an etch-and-rinse adhesive protocol were superior to the ones achieved with a self-etching strategy without selective enamel-etching. Selective enamel etching is recommended for self-etching systems. Biological responses were similar for all three adhesive strategies.

Eighteen-month clinical evaluation of a new universal adhesive applied in the "no-waiting" technique: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this double-blind, randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the 6- and 18-month clinical performances of a new universal adhesive applied in the "no-waiting" (NW) technique to non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) using two evaluation criteria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and seventy-six restorations were assigned to four groups according to the adhesive system, adhesive strategy, and application mode: Prime&Bond Active (PB) applied using the etch-and-rinse (ER) and self-etch (SE) strategies with 20 s applications and Clearfil Universal Bond Quick (CQ) applied using the ER and SE strategies with the NW technique. The composite resin restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 6 and 18 months using the World Dental Federation (FDI) and US Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. The Friedman repeated measures analysis of variance and Wilcoxon test were used for statistical analyses (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed among any of the groups or criteria after 6 months (p > 0.05). After 18 months, 10 restorations were lost (p > 0.05) (2 with PB-ER [95.5%; 95%CI: 92-100%], 4 with PB-SE [90.9%; 95%CI: 82-98%], 0 with CQ-ER [100%; 95%CI: 92-100%], and 4 with CQ-SE [90.9%; 82-98%]). The restorations performed with the SE strategy showed more marginal discrepancies than those performed with the ER strategy, mainly when the FDI criteria were used (p < 0.05). Those that used the PB-SE showed fewer marginal discrepancies than those that used the CQ-SE (FDI; p < 0.05). A few restorations showed marginal discrepancies after the USPHS analysis (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The results when using the CQ-SE and -ER strategies with the NW technique were similar to those when using the PB-SE and -ER strategies in standard applications to non-carious cervical lesions after 6 and 18 months of clinical evaluation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

After 6 and 18 months, the application of Clearfil Universal Bond Quick with the "no-waiting" technique showed similar clinical performance compared to the standard application of Prime & Bond Active applied using the standard application time (20 s).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier RBR-5f9gps.

Effect of Dentin Moisture in Posterior Restorations Performed with Universal Adhesive: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVES

This double-blind, randomized clinical trial evaluated the influence of dentin moisture on postoperative sensitivity (POS), as well as, on clinical performance in posterior bulk-fill composite restorations, using a universal adhesive, until 12 months after clinical service.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In accordance with a split-mouth design, 45 patients received posterior restorations, restored with a bulk-fill resin composite (Filtek Bulk Fill, 3M Oral Care) and a universal adhesive used in etch-and-rinse mode (SBU; Single Bond Universal Adhesive), which were applied on dry or moist dentin, with a cavity depth of at least 3 mm. Three operators placed 90 Class I/Class II restorations. Patients were evaluated for spontaneous and stimulated POS in the baseline, and after 48 hours, 7 days, and at 6 and 12 months. In addition, secondary parameters (marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, fracture, and recurrent caries) were evaluated by World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria after 7 days and at 6 and 12 months. Statistical analyzes were performed using the Chi-square, Fisher exact, Friedman, Kruskall-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney tests (α=0.05).

RESULTS

No significant spontaneous and stimulated POS was observed when SBU was applied in dry and moist dentin (p>0.05). A significant and higher risk of spontaneous POS (20.0%; 95%CI 10.9-33.82 for dry dentin and 22.22%; 95%CI 12.54-36.27 for moist dentin) occurred up to 48 hours after restoration placement for the dry and moist dentin groups (p<0.02). However, the POS intensity was mild up to 48 hours with no significant difference between dry and moist dentin groups (p>0.79). When secondary parameters were evaluated, no significant differences between the groups were observed.

CONCLUSION

Dentin moisture did not influence POS in posterior bulk-fill composite restorations when associated with a universal adhesive applied in etch-and-rinse mode.

Thirty-six-month follow-up of cervical composite restorations placed with an MDP-free universal adhesive system using different adhesive protocols: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the influence of different application strategies on the clinical behavior of an MDP-free universal adhesive placed in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) over the course of 36 months.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-one patients participated in this study (N = 31). One hundred twenty-four restorations were assigned to four groups: We used the self-etch strategy on groups with (SE-et) and without (SET) selective enamel etching, and the etch-and-rinse strategy on groups with dry (ER-D) and moist (ER-M) dentin. After applying the MDP-free universal adhesive (Xeno Select universal adhesive, Dentsply Sirona), cavities were filled using EvoluX composite resin (Dentsply Sirona). The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 36 months according to World Dental Federation (FDI) and US Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Friedman's repeated-measures analysis of variance rank (α = 0.05) was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

We evaluated the 31 patients after 36 months. Forty-two restorations were lost (ER-D = 5, ER-M = 7, SE-et = 14, SET = 16). The 36-month retention/fracture rates (95% confidence interval) were 83.9% for ER-D, 77.4% for ER-M, 54.9% for SE-et, and 48.4% for SET. ER strategy showed better retention rate than SE strategy (p < 0.05). Thirty-four restorations (ER-D = 6, ER-M = 10, SE-et = 10, SET = 8) showed marginal staining per FDI criteria and 15 restorations (ER-D = 1, ER-M = 2, SE-et = 6, SET = 6) showed marginal staining per USPHS criteria. No restorations showed postoperative sensitivity or recurrence of caries.

CONCLUSION

The retention rate of Xeno Select universal adhesive was poor, mainly in the self-etch strategy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

REBEC clinical registry under protocol RBR-4wh4sh.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

MDP-free universal adhesive behavior depends on the bonding strategy used.

Is clinical behavior of composite restorations placed in non-carious cervical lesions influenced by the application mode of universal adhesives? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To answer the following PICOS question: "Is the risk of retention loss, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation and postoperative sensitivity (POS) equal for etch-and-rinse (EAR) compared to self-etch (SE) or selective-enamel etch (SEE) mode when restoring non carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) with universal adhesives?".

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scientific Electronic Library Online, LILACS, OpenGrey and Google Scholar™ were searched. Randomized controlled clinical trials in which resin composites and universal adhesives were used for restoration of NCCLs were considered. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Meta-analyses were performed using Revman; random-effects models were applied, and heterogeneity was tested using the I² index. The significance level was set at p < 0.05. Certainty of evidence was assessed by GRADE tool.

RESULTS

After screening, 20 articles were included in qualitative, while 14 articles were used for quantitative synthesis. Twelve studies ranked as "low", while 8 studies scored as "unclear" for risk of bias. At 12- and 18/24-months the risk for retention loss was higher for SE than for EAR groups (p = 0.005; RR = 0.22, 95% CI [0.08, 0.63],[moderate certainty of evidence and p = 0.0002; RR = 0.32, 95% CI [0.17, 0.58], moderate certainty of evidence, respectively). No significant differences were observed for marginal discoloration and adaptation (p > 0.05). The probability of POS occurrence was less in SE than in EAR groups (RR = 2.12, 95% CI [1.23, 3.64], moderate certainty of evidence). The certainty of evidence for other outcomes was scored as "low" or "moderate", depending on the follow-up period.

SIGNIFICANCE

Using universal adhesives in EAR or SEE mode provides more predictable retention, while SE strategy reduces the risk of POS occurrence.