A randomized clinical study of the performance of self-etching adhesives containing HEMA and 10-MDP on non-carious cervical lesions: A 2-year follow-up study

Oliveira, Roberta Pimentel de; Paula, Brennda Lucy Freitas de; Alencar, Cristiane de Melo; Alves, Eliane Bemerguy; Silva, Cecy Martins

doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104407

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most systematic studies have mentioned the superiority of the total-etch technique to the self-etch [ 24 , 29 , 32 , 34 , 46 , 47 ], whereas only Josic et al (2021) reported no difference [ 35 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A 2-Year Randomized Clinical Trial of Three Bonding Techniques in Non-Carious Cervical Lesions

Pappa,

Gkavela,

Sampri

et al. 2024

Medicina

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objective: The aim of this randomized split-mouth study-controlled clinical trial was to compare the 2-year clinical performance of resin composite restorations placed at non-caries cervical lesions (NCCL) with one-step self-etch, total-etch, and selective enamel etch and self-etch adhesive techniques. Materials and methods: Thirty-two patients received three resin composite restorations each at NCCLs (Tetric EvoCeram/Ivoclar/Vivadent), bonded with a total-etch adhesive agent (ExciTE F/Ivoclar/Vivadent) and a self-etch (AdheSE One F/Ivoclar/Vivadent) without and with selective enamel etching. All restorations were evaluated by two examiners at baseline, 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-months with FDI clinical criteria (post-operation regarding retention, caries occurrence, marginal adaptation, and marginal staining). A logistic regression analysis, a Cohen’s kappa statistic, a multifactorial analysis, and X2 were performed with generalized estimating equations. Results: After 2 years, the retention rate was 86.8% for total etch, 92.26% for self-etch, and 93.63% for selective enamel etching and self-etch. No caries was detected on the restorations. Concerning marginal adaptation, the clinically perfect restorations were 26.9% for the total-etch technique, 16% for self-etch, and 25.9% for selective enamel etch and self-etch. The logistic regression model revealed that only time reduced the probability of perfect marginal adaptation. Conclusions: All three adhesive strategies provided restorations with no significant differences in the retention rate or marginal adaptation, whereas the total etch yielded better performance for marginal staining. All restorations were assessed as clinically acceptable after 2 years.

show abstract