Five-year Randomized Clinical Trial on the Performance of Two Etch-and-rinse Adhesives in Noncarious Cervical Lesions

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the 5-year clinical performance of two-step etch-and-rinse adhesives in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCL).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The sample comprised 35 adults with at least two similar-sized NCCL. Seventy restorations were placed, according to one of the following groups: Adper Single Bond 2 (SB) and Ambar (AM). The restorations were placed incrementally using a resin composite (Opallis). The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 6 and 18 months and 5 years using some items of the FDI criteria. The differences in the ratings of the two materials after 6 months, 18 months, and 5 years were performed with Friedman repeated measures ANOVA by rank and McNemar test for significance in each pair (α=0.05).

RESULTS

Five patients did not attend the 60-month recall. No significant differences were observed between the materials for any criteria evaluated. Twenty-one restorations failed (12 for SB and 9 for AM) after 60 months. Thus, the retention rate for SB at 60 months were 55.6% for SB and 71% for AM (p=0.32). After 60 months, 12 restorations (6 for SB and 6 AM) showed some loss of marginal adaptation (p=1.0). Slight marginal discoloration was observed in 10 restorations (6 for SB and 4 AM; p=0.91). Five restorations (2 for SB and 3 for AM) showed recurrences of caries (p=1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Both two-step etch-and-rinse adhesives-Adper Single Bond 2, a polyalkenoic acid-containing adhesive, and Ambar, a 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (MDP)-containing adhesive-showed acceptable clinical performance after 60 months.

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

Alterações das Propriedades Ópticas das Resinas Bulk-Fill Após 2 Anos

O objetivo do presente trabalho foi avaliar a alteração das propriedades ópticas de resinas tipo Bulk Fill após 2 anos. Três resinas Bulk-fill (Aura Bulk fill, Tetrik n-Ceram Bulk fill e Filtek Bulk fill) e uma resina convencional (Filtek Z350) foram analisadas. Espécimes (n 5) medindo 9 mm diâmetro e 2 mm de altura foram confeccionados e fotopolimerizados com uma irradiância de 650 mW/cm por 40 s. As propriedades de brilho, cor, translucidez e rugosidade foram medidas imediatamente (24 h a 37 oC) e após um ano e dois anos de escovação simulada. Adicionalmente, o grau de conversão e a integral foram avaliados através de FTIR para verificar a existência de diferentes monômeros na composição. Os dados obtidos foram analisados utilizando MANOVA e Tukey’s HSD test (a 0.05). Diferença significativa foi encontrada nas propriedades brilho e a rugosidade na interação resina-tempo. As características de translucidez e cor não foram afetadas. Pode-se concluir que a escovação poderia alterar consideravelmente o brilho e a rugosidade das resinas Bulk-fill.Palavras-chave: Resinas Compostas. Estabilidade. Escovação.

Longitudinal Evaluation of Radiopacity of Resin Composites: Influence of Photoactivation and Accelerated Photoaging

This study aimed to assess longitudinally the radiopacity of resin composites under the influence of photoactivation and photoaging processes. Ten specimens (1 mm thick and 4 mm in diameter) of three different microhybrid resin composites, Filtek Z250 XT (R1), TPH 3 Spectrum (R2), and Opallis (R3), were prepared for this study. For longitudinal assessment of radiopacity, radiographic images were obtained five times. The first time (T1), the specimens were not photoactivated; the second time (T2), the specimens were photoactivated; and the next three times, photoaging was carried out, with images obtained at 24 hours (T3), 48 hours (T4), and 72 hours (T5) after this process. The photoaging was conducted using LED light (700 lumens, 9 W, 6400 k) under controlled environmental conditions at 37°C (±1°C) and 65% (±5%) relative humidity. The digital system DIGORA Optime was used. The digital images were measured using the histogram function, and then the pixel intensity values were converted into mmAl (the standard unit of radiopacity) using a linear regression function, with minimal adjustment of R² ≥ 0.9. Data in mmAl were statistically analyzed using an analysis of variance (α=0.05). R2 resin composite showed higher values of radiopacity, R1 resin composite showed intermediate values, and R3 resin composite showed lower values. Only at T1 did the higher radiopacity of R2 composite differ significantly from other groups ( p = 0.0000). After application of treatments (photoactivation and photoaging), all radiopacity values were similar ( p-values to T2=0.0507, T3=0.0536, T4=0.0502, T5=0.0501) due to consecutive increase of radiopacity of R1 and R3 composites from T2. Photoactivation and photoaging processes influenced the radiopacity, but changes occurring in the degree of radiopacity were dependent on the composition and chemical characteristics of each composite used.

Six-month Follow-up of Cervical Composite Restorations Placed With a New Universal Adhesive System: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose: The objective of this double-blind, randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the six-month clinical performance of a new universal adhesive (Xeno Select, Dentsply) in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) using two evaluation criteria: World Dental Federation (FDI) and the US Public Health Service (USPHS).

Methods and Materials: A total of 124 restorations were randomly placed in 31 patients according to the following groups: ER-D = etch-and-rinse/dry dentin; ER-M = etch-and-rinse/moist dentin; SE-et = selective enamel etching; and SET = self-etch. The composite resin EVOLUX (Dentsply) was placed incrementally. The restorations were evaluated after one week (baseline) and at six months using the FDI and USPHS criteria. Statistical analyses were performed using appropriate tests (α=0.05).

Results: Fifteen restorations were lost or fractured at six months (one for ER-D, three for ER-M, five for SE-et, and six for SET) (p>0.05 at six-month recall). When ER (ER-D and ER-M) was compared with SE (SE-et and SET) there was a significant difference in the retention rate after six months (p=0.001). Marginal staining and postoperative sensitivity to air were only observed in three (one for ER-M and two for SET) and two restorations (two for ER-D) in both evaluation criteria (p>0.05), respectively. Forty-seven restorations were considered to have minor discrepancies in marginal adaptation at the six-month recall using the FDI criteria (13 for ER-D, 10 for ER-M, 11 for SE-et, and 13 for SET; p>0.05 between groups). However, for all groups, a significant difference was detected when baseline and six-month data were compared (p<0.05).

Conclusions: The six-month clinical behavior of Xeno Select Universal Adhesive depends on the bonding strategy used. The universal adhesive did not fulfill the American Dental Association criteria for full approval when used in the self-etch mode.