Thirty-six-month follow-up of cervical composite restorations placed with an MDP-free universal adhesive system using different adhesive protocols: a randomized clinical trial

Barceleiro, Marcos de Oliveira; Lopes, Letícia Souza; Tardem, Chane; Calazans, Fernanda Signorelli; Matos, Thalita de Paris; Reis, Alessandra; Calixto, Abraham Lincoln; Loguércio, Alessandro Dourado

doi:10.1007/s00784-022-04397-x

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, XEN attained lower bond strength values and worse sealing capacity than SBU, immediately and after 6 months of water storage, regardless of the adhesive strategy selected, in accordance with Siqueira et al (2018) [21]. This deficient bonding ability of XEN has been confirmed in a recent 36-month clinical study [7] in non-carious cervical lesions. In this clinical report retention rates of only 55% and 48% were determined when it was applied in SE mode, with and without selective enamel etching, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…XEN does not contain 10-MDP and its interaction with dentin has been described to occur by an "inverse" functionalized phosphoric acid ester and an acryloylaminoalkylsulfonic acid [7,21]. However, chemical bonding to dentin surfaces has not been detected, probably due to the acidic nature of this adhesive, as it is classified as an "intermediate strong" adhesive (pH 1.6) [23], unlike SBU and CSE which are "mild" self-etch adhesives (pH 2.7 [8,23,41] and 2 [25], respectively).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, chemical bonding to dentin surfaces has not been detected, probably due to the acidic nature of this adhesive, as it is classified as an "intermediate strong" adhesive (pH 1.6) [23], unlike SBU and CSE which are "mild" self-etch adhesives (pH 2.7 [8,23,41] and 2 [25], respectively). The acidic monomers contained in XEN may be able to continue demineralizing the dentin even after polymerization [21], exposing more collagen fibrils and causing greater degradation of the adhesive interface [7].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This monomer has a proven potential to chemically interact with hydroxyapatite creating a nano-layered structure of MDP-Ca salts at the interface that appears to be hydrolytically stable and improves adhesion strength [1,3,5]. Alternatively, other functional monomers can be found in the composition of these universal adhesives, such as dipentaerythritol pentaacrylate monophosphate (PENTA) or glycero-phosphate dimethacrylate (GPDM), although their key contribution to the adhesive properties to dentin remains controversial [2,6,7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Long-Term In Vitro Adhesive Properties of Two Universal Adhesives to Dentin

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The composition of universal adhesives, as well as the adhesive strategy, may influence bonding effectiveness and durability. This study aimed to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) and nanoleakage (NL), immediately and after 6-month aging, and in situ degree of conversion (DC), of two universal adhesives (Scotchbond Universal Adhesive, SBU; Xeno Select, XEN) applied with etch-and-rinse (ER) and self-etch (SE) strategies, in comparison with a two-step SE adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond, CSE). Dentin surfaces of fifty human third molars were randomly assigned to the following adhesives: two universal adhesives, SBU and XEN, applied in ER or SE mode and CSE, used as control. Teeth were sectioned into beams to be tested under µTBS, half of them after 24 h, and the rest after 6 months of water aging. Selected beams from each tooth were used for NL evaluation and in situ DC quantification. SBU and CSE showed significantly higher mean µTBS and lower nanoleakage than XEN, regardless of the evaluation time and adhesion strategy. XEN-SE yielded the lowest degree of conversion. Therefore, adhesive properties of universal adhesives to dentin are material dependent, regardless of the adhesion strategy, exhibiting XEN a significantly worse performance than SBU.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Long-Term In Vitro Adhesive Properties of Two Universal Adhesives to Dentin

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the manufacturer, owing to its hydrophilic core and five double bonds per molecule, dipentaerythritol pentacrylate phosphate (PENTA) is an effective crosslinker agent that is responsible for increasing the wettability of PB. PENTA was used in different “Prime&Bond” adhesive generations (Dentsply Sirona), and despite the controversial results observed when previous generations of PENTA-containing adhesives were evaluated [ 22 , 44 , 45 ], in vitro studies have shown that PB has a higher resin–dentin bond strength than other universal adhesives [ 24 , 46 , 47 ]. This was one of the main reasons for using this material as a control in the present study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eighteen-month clinical evaluation of a new universal adhesive applied in the “no-waiting” technique: a randomized clinical trial

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract