Clinical evaluation of universal adhesives used with different application modes on the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: preliminary findings of a 12-month randomized, controlled clinical trial

Year 2019, Volume: 36 Issue: 1, 7 - 15, 02.01.2019

Fatma Dilşad Öz , Esra Ergin Simge Canatan

https://doi.org/10.17214/gaziaot.438002

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the
performances of two different universal adhesives applied with different modes and
an etch&rinse adhesive for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions.

Materials and Method:
Twenty patients received 155 restorations. The lesions
were divided into 7 groups based on the adhesive systems and application modes:
GSE: Gluma Universal/self-etch, GSL: Gluma Universal/selective-etching,
GER: Gluma Universal/etch&rinse, ASE: All Bond Universal/self etch, ASL:
All Bond Universal/selective-etching, AER: All Bond Universal/etch&rinse,
SB (Control): Single Bond 2/etch&rinse. A nano-hybrid
composite resin was used for the restorations. Then, the restorations were
scored according to USPHS criteria after a week, 6- and 12-months. The data
were statistically analyzed using Chi-square, Cochrane Q and McNemar’s tests (α=0.05).

Results: On the 6th month of the evaluation three restorations from each
of the GSE and ASE groups lost retention, and on the 12th month of the
evaluation cumulative retention loss rate was 23.8%
for the GSE and 20% for the ASE groups (p<0.05,
more restoration loss in these groups were seen compared to the other groups).
On the 6th and 12th month of the evaluations, no statistically significant
differences were found among the groups for marginal adaptation, marginal
discoloration, secondary caries and post-operative sensitivity (p>0.05). Regarding
the intra-group comparisons, compared to the baseline, a significant retention
loss was seen in the ASE and GSE groups as early as 6-months; and significant marginal
adaptation loss and marginal discoloration was detected in all groups on the 12th
month (p<0.05).

Conclusion: Regarding the
retention on the 12th month, Gluma Universal and All-Bond Universal applied
with the etch&rinse and selective-etching modes were similar to the
control, and showed better results than those applied with the self-etch mode. Marginal
adaptation, marginal discoloration, post-operative sensitivity and secondary
caries were similar among all the groups.

Keywords

Composite dental resin, dentin-bonding agents, tooth wear

Çürüksüz servikal lezyonların restorasyonunda universal adezivlerin farklı uygulama şekillerinin restorasyonların performansı üzerine etkilerinin değerlendirilmesi: 12-aylık randomize kontrollü klinik bir çalışmanın ön raporu

Abstract

Amaç:
Çürüksüz servikal lezyonların restorasyonunda iki farklı universal adezivin
farklı yöntemlerle uygulanmasının ve bir etch&rinse adezivin, restorasyonların
performansı üzerine etkilerini değerlendirmektir.

Gereç ve Yöntem: Yirmi katılımcı çalışmaya dahil edildi. Lezyonlar kullanılan adeziv
sistemlere ve uygulama şekillerine göre 7 gruba ayrıldı: GSE: Gluma Universal/self-etch,
GSL: Gluma Universal/selektif-etch, GER: Gluma Universal/etch&rinse,
ASE:All Bond Universal/self-etch, ASL: All Bond Universal/selektif-etch, AER: All
Bond Universal/etch&rinse, SBE (Kontrol): Single Bond2/etch&rinse.
Toplam 155 çürüksüz servikal lezyon bir nanohibrit kompozit rezinle restore
edildi. Restorasyonlar USPHS kriterleri
kullanılarak bir hafta (başlangıç), 6 ay ve 12 ay sonra değerlendirildi.
Veriler istatistiksel olarak Ki-kare, Cochran Q ve McNemar testleri kullanılarak
analiz edildi (α=0.05).

Bulgular: Altıncı ayda,
GSE ve ASE gruplarında 3’er restorasyonda retansiyon kaybı görüldü (p<0.05).
Onikinci ayda kümülatif retansiyon kaybı oranı GSE grubu için %23.8 ve ASE
grubu için %20’ydi; bu gruplarda diğerlerine göre istatistiksel olarak anlamlı
düzeyde daha fazla restorasyon kaybı görüldü (p<0.05). Kenar uyumu, kenar
renklenmesi, dentin duyarlılığı ve ikincil çürük açısından deneysel gruplar
arasında 6. ve 12. ayda istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark tespit edilmedi
(p>0.05). Gruplar
kendi içerisinde başlangıca göre karşılaştırıldığında, GSE ve ASE grupları 6.
ayda retansiyon açısından ve tüm gruplar 12. ayda kenar uyumu ve kenar
renklenmesi açısından anlamlı değişim gösterdi (p<0.05).

Sonuç: Oniki aylık değerlendirme süreci
sonunda, Gluma Universal ve All Bond Universal adeziv sistemleri,
etch&rinse ve selektif-etch yöntemleriyle uygulandığında, kontrol grubuna
benzer şekilde ve self-etch yöntemine kıyasla, retansiyon açısından daha üstün
klinik performans gösterdi. Kenar uyumu, kenar renklenmesi, dentin duyarlılığı
ve ikincil çürük açısından tüm gruplar benzer klinik performans sergiledi.

Keywords

Dentin yapıştırma ajanları, diş aşınması, kompozit dental rezin

References

• Levitch LC, Bader JD, Shugars DA, Heymann HO. Non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent 1994;22:195-207.
• van Dijken JW. Durability of three simplified adhesive systems in Class V non-carious cervical dentin lesions. Am J Dent 2004;17:27-32.
• Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Vijay P, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent 2003;28:215-35.
• Loguercio AD, Bittencourt DD, Baratieri LN, Reis A. A 36-month evaluation of self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesives in noncarious cervical lesions. J Am Dent Assoc 2007;138:507-14.
• Zander-Grande C, Amaral RC, Loguercio AD, Barroso LP, Reis A. Clinical performance of one-step self-etch adhesives applied actively in cervical lesions: 24-month clinical trial. Oper Dent 2014;39:228-38.
• Alex G. Universal adhesives: the next evolution in adhesive dentistry? Compend Contin Educ Dent 2015;36:15-26.
• Mena-Serrano A, Kose C, De Paula EA, Tay LY, Reis A, Loguercio AD, et al. A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month clinical evaluation. J Esthet Restor Dent 2013;25:55-69.
• Perdigao J, Kose C, Mena-Serrano AP, De Paula EA, Tay LY, Reis A, et al. A new universal simplified adhesive: 18-month clinical evaluation. Oper Dent 2014;39:113-27.
• Loguercio AD, Manica D, Ferneda F, Zander-Grande C, Amaral R, Stanislawczuk R, et al. A randomized clinical evaluation of a one- and two-step self-etch adhesive over 24 months. Oper Dent 2010;35:265-72.
• Turkun LS. The clinical performance of one- and two-step self-etching adhesive systems at one year. J Am Dent Assoc 2005;136:656-64.
• Tay FR, Pashley DH, Garcia-Godoy F, Yiu CK. Single-step, self-etch adhesives behave as permeable membranes after polymerization. Part II. Silver tracer penetration evidence. Am J Dent 2004;17:315-22.
• Moosavi H, Kimyai S, Forghani M, Khodadadi R. The clinical effectiveness of various adhesive systems: an 18-month evaluation. Oper Dent 2013;38:134-41.
• Tuncer D, Yazici AR, Ozgunaltay G, Dayangac B. Clinical evaluation of different adhesives used in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: 24-month results. Aust Dent J 2013;58:94-100.
• Van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, Yoshida Y, Mine A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL. State of the art of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 2011;27:17-28.
• Peumans M, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Van Meerbeek B. Thirteen-year randomized controlled clinical trial of a two-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions. Dent Mater 2015;31:308-14.
• De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Braem M, et al. A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results. J Dent Res 2005;84:118-32.
• Brackett WW, Covey DA, St Germain HA, Jr. One-year clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive in class V resin composites cured by two methods. Oper Dent 2002;27:218-22.
• Dalton Bittencourt D, Ezecelevski IG, Reis A, Van Dijken JW, Loguercio AD. An 18-months' evaluation of self-etch and etch & rinse adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions. Acta Odontol Scand 2005;63:173-8.
• Van Landuyt KL, Yoshida Y, Hirata I, Snauwaert J, De Munck J, Okazaki M, et al. Influence of the chemical structure of functional monomers on their adhesive performance. J Dent Res 2008;87:757-61.
• Pashley DH, Tay FR, Carvalho RM, Rueggeberg FA, Agee KA, Carrilho M, et al. From dry bonding to water-wet bonding to ethanol-wet bonding. A review of the interactions between dentin matrix and solvated resins using a macromodel of the hybrid layer. Am J Dent 2007;20:7-20.
• Rueggeberg FA, Margeson DH. The effect of oxygen inhibition on an unfilled/filled composite system. J Dent Res 1990;69:1652-8.
• Reis A, Loguercio AD. A 36-month clinical evaluation of ethanol/water and acetone-based etch-and-rinse adhesives in non-carious cervical lesions. Oper Dent 2009;34:384-91.
• Karaman E, Yazici AR, Ozgunaltay G, Dayangac B. Clinical evaluation of a nanohybrid and a flowable resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions: 24-month results. J Adhes Dent 2012;14:485-92.
• Hanabusa M, Mine A, Kuboki T, Momoi Y, Van Ende A, Van Meerbeek B, et al. Bonding effectiveness of a new 'multi-mode' adhesive to enamel and dentine. J Dent 2012;40:475-84.
• Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives: a systematic review of current clinical trials. Dent Mater 2005;21:864-81.
• Boushell LW, Heymann HO, Ritter AV, Sturdevant JR, Swift EJ, Jr., Wilder AD, Jr., et al. Six-year clinical performance of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 2016;32:1065-72.
• Hajizadeh H, Nemati-Karimooy A, Nasseh A, Rahmanpour N. Evaluating the shear bond strength of enamel and dentin with or without etching: A comparative study between dimethacrylate-based and silorane-based adhesives. J Clin Exp Dent 2015;7:563-8.
• Juloski J, Goracci C, Rengo C, Giovannetti A, Vichi A, Vulicevic ZR, et al. Enamel and dentin bond strength of new simplified adhesive materials with and without preliminary phosphoric acid-etching. Am J Dent 2012;25:239-43.
• Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions. Oper Dent 2007;32:11-5.
• van Dijken JW. Clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems in class V non-carious lesions. Dent Mater 2000;16:285-91.
• Can Say E, Yurdaguven H, Ozel E, Soyman M. A randomized five-year clinical study of a two-step self-etch adhesive with or without selective enamel etching. Dent Mater J 2014;33:757-63.
• Fron H, Vergnes JN, Moussally C, Cazier S, Simon AL, Chieze JB, et al. Effectiveness of a new one-step self-etch adhesive in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: 2-year results of a randomized controlled practice-based study. Dent Mater 2011;27:304-12.
• Szesz A, Parreiras S, Reis A, Loguercio A. Selective enamel etching in cervical lesions for self-etch adhesives: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2016;53:1-11.
• Sai K, Takamizawa T, Imai A, Tsujimoto A, Ishii R, Barkmeier WW, et al. Influence of Application Time and Etching Mode of Universal Adhesives on Enamel Adhesion. J Adhes Dent 2018;20:65-77.
• Vidotti HA, Garcia RP, Conti PC, Pereira JR, Valle AL. Influence of low concentration acid treatment on lithium disilicate core/veneer ceramic bond strength. J Clin Exp Dent 2013;5:157-62.
• Loguercio AD, de Paula EA, Hass V, Luque-Martinez I, Reis A, Perdigao J. A new universal simplified adhesive: 36-Month randomized double-blind clinical trial. J Dent 2015;43:1083-92.
• Lawson NC, Robles A, Fu CC, Lin CP, Sawlani K, Burgess JO. Two-year clinical trial of a universal adhesive in total-etch and self-etch mode in non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent 2015;43:1229-34.
• Ruschel VC, Shibata S, Stolf SC, Chung Y, Baratieri LN, Heymann HO, et al. Eighteen-month Clinical Study of Universal Adhesives in Noncarious Cervical Lesions. Oper Dent 2018;43:241-49.
• Lenzi TL, Pires CW, Soares FZM, Raggio DP, Ardenghi TM, de Oliveira Rocha R. Performance of Universal Adhesive in Primary Molars After Selective Removal of Carious Tissue: An 18-Month Randomized Clinical Trial. Pediatr Dent 2017;39:371-76.
• van Dijken JW. A prospective 8-year evaluation of a mild two-step self-etching adhesive and a heavily filled two-step etch-and-rinse system in non-carious cervical lesions. Dent Mater 2010;26:940-6.