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

Abstract

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.

Performance of self-cured versus light-cured universal adhesive in patients with non-carious cervical lesions: 18-month randomized clinical trial

“…However, the clinical performance of this adhesive is not fully approved in the literature. On the other hand, the light-cured universal adhesive is characterized by its ability to bond chemically to the tooth structure owing to the presence of 10-MDP functional monomer and polyalkenic acid [ 21 , 22 ].…”

Analyzing the Impact of Different Bonding Protocol Strategies to Improve the Fracture Resistance of Uncomplicated Crown Fractures on Tooth Fracture Reattachment in Permanent Anterior Teeth: An In-vitro Study

“…Additional research and clinical studies are essential to validate these findings and evaluate the long-term success and clinical applicability of reattaching tooth fragments using different bonding techniques [23]. Understanding the strengths and limitations of each approach will aid dental professionals in providing effective and aesthetically pleasing treatments for traumatic dental injuries, ultimately benefiting patients' oral health and well-being.…”

Performance of self-cured versus light-cured universal adhesive in patients with non- carious cervical lesions: 18-month randomized clinical trial.

“…On the other hand, the light-cured universal adhesive is characterized by its ability to bond chemically to the tooth structure owing to the presence of 10-MDP functional monomer and polyalkenic acid. 21,22 Clinical performance of these adhesives was tested in NCCLs as the retention here depends mainly on the bond quality without any mechanical retention support. Moreover, dentin in NCCLs is considered the most problematic coronal substrate as mentioned in the introduction.…”