Is the Ethanol Wet-bonding Technique a Promising One?

Júnior, Mário Honorato da Silva e Souza; Ferreira, Railson de Oliveira; Araujo, Jonas B.; Barros, Thaís Andrade de Figueiredo; Braga, Esther Marina França; Loretto, Sandro Cordeiro

doi:10.4067/s0718-381x2015000300017

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 25 publications

(51 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides, some unfavorable aspects are mentioned in the literature, such as the time consuming technique, which demands several sequential steps, making the clinical procedure not attractive (Souza Júnior et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethanol-Wet Bonding Technique: 18-month Clinical Evaluation

Barros¹,

Araújo

Braga

et al. 2016

Int. J. Odontostomat.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:The objective of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical performance up to 18 months of restorations placed using ethanol-wet bonding technique (EWBT) compared with the three-step etch-and-rinse (TSER) and one-step self-etching (OSSE) approaches. Ninety-three non-carious cervical lesions (31 for each group) were restored by one experienced operator in 17 patients under relatively dry conditions using gingival retraction cord, cotton rolls and saliva ejector. Each adhesive system was randomly allocated to one of randomized cervical lesions until the three groups were present in the same subject in equal amounts. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months by two blinded and calibrated examiners using the modified US Public Health Service guidelines (USPHS) for the following outcomes: retention (kappa= 1.00), staining and marginal adaptation (kappa=0.81) and analyzed by Fisher's exact and Kruskal-Wallis tests, respectively. No significant differences were observed among groups after 18 months for any of the assessed criteria (p>0.05). The intra-group analysis performed by Cochran's test (for retention) and Wilcoxon test (for marginal adaptation/staining) revealed significant differences between the time intervals baseline/18 months in marginal adaptation (p= 0.0117) and retention (p= 0.0101) for OSSE and in marginal staining for TSER (0.0051) and EWBT (p= 0.0277) groups. The survival analysis for retention criteria and the overall clinical success were performed using a log-rank test and did not show significant differences among groups (p> 0.05). All three adhesives protocols presented similar clinical performance up to 18 months.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%