Background: When a phosphoric acid is used, before applying an adhesive system, it is known that obtaining an effective adhesion to the root canal walls is a challenge. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the influence of phosphoric acid viscosity and application mode on the push-out bond strength (BS) values of fiberglass post to root dentin. The conditioning pattern on the root dentin was also evaluated. Materials and Methods: The roots of 44 endodontically treated premolars were divided into 4 groups, of eleven teeth each, according to the combination of the main factors: phosphoric acid viscosity (liquid or gel) and application mode (passive or sonic). After application of the two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive system, the fiberglass posts were cemented with a dual-cure resin-cement. Roots were sectioned transversely into six 1-mm slices for push-out BS test at 0.5 mm/min. Some roots of each group were selected for evaluation of the conditioning pattern by scanning electron microscopy. BS results (three-way ANOVA and Tukey's test) and the conditioning pattern (Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney test) were statistically evaluated (α= 0.05). Results: The highest BS value was observed with a liquid phosphoric acid under sonic application mode (p < 0.05), being all other groups similar to one another (p < 0.05). Also, the highest BS value was observed in the cervical third, followed by the medium and the apical thirds (p < 0.05). The sonic application produced better smear layer removal and opening of dentinal tubules for both viscosities (p = 0.015). Conclusion: A better bonding of fiberglass posts to root canals can be achieved when the post spaces are conditioned with a liquid phosphoric acid under sonic application.

SUMMARY 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.

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.

Background: Public health problems associated with oral disease affect large numbers of people in countries around the world. Dental caries continues to be the main cause of premature tooth loss in patients and can negatively affect the Quality of life (QoL) related to oral health for both the individual and their family. Depending on their stage of advancement of caries, a restorative procedure is required, since caries injuries generally involve changing the shape, function or esthetics, restoring is intended to extend the life of the teeth, The purpose of this study was evaluated direct restorations on posterior teeth with conventional and bulk-fill composite resins performed by public health professionals and their effect on Quality of life. Methods: The sample consisted of 100 teeth in 50 patients. The teeth selected for the restorative procedure were randomized in the two study groups according to restorative material. Group 1 - Bulk fill composite resin, or Group 2 - Conventional composite resin. At the end of 12 and 24 months, the restorations were evaluated according to USPHS criteria, by two evaluators. To evaluate the Quality of Life related to oral health, Oral Health Impact Profile – 14 (OHIP-14) was used before and after restorative treatment (12 months). Results: After 12 months, 90 restorations were evaluated that showed no statistical difference (p> 0.05), after 24 months, 80 restorations evaluated and also showed similar clinical performance and no statistical difference (p> 0.05). The analysis of quality of life detected a statistical difference only in the psychological discomfort domain (p = 0.024), improving their values at the end of the treatment. There are no differences between the clinical performance with conventional resins or bulk-fill system. Restorative treatment improved the perception of concern and stress suffered by patients by dental problems. Clinical Trial Registry: RBR-7hbmjp