Effect of an Additional Hydrophobic Adhesive Layer Application on the Clinical Performance of Class V Resin Composite Restorations: An 18-month Randomized Clinical Trial.

IF 1.4 4区医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Operative dentistry Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.2341/23-024-C

M Berkman, S Tuncer, F Karabay, M Demirci, N Tekçe, C Baydemir

{"title":"Effect of an Additional Hydrophobic Adhesive Layer Application on the Clinical Performance of Class V Resin Composite Restorations: An 18-month Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"M Berkman, S Tuncer, F Karabay, M Demirci, N Tekçe, C Baydemir","doi":"10.2341/23-024-C","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the 18-month clinical performance of two different one-step adhesives that were applied alone or with an additional hydrophobic adhesive layer to noncarious cervical lesions.Methods and materials: One hundred sixty teeth in 31 patients were included in the study. Each patient received at least four restorations. A 2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate (HEMA)-containing one-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil S3 Bond Plus, Kuraray Noritake, Noritake, Japan) and a HEMA-free universal adhesive (G-Premio Bond) were applied to noncarious cervical lesions with or without additional hydrophobic adhesive (Heliobond) randomly. Teeth were restored with a nanohybrid composite. Restorations were evaluated according to FDI criteria at baseline, 6-, 12-, and 18-month recalls. Data were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis and the Friedman analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests (α=0.05).Results: At 18 months, recall rates were 100%, and there was no significant difference between four different adhesive applications in terms of any criteria (p>0.05). The cumulative retention rates were 92.5%, 92.5%, 97.5%, and 100% for the restorations with one-step self-etch, one-step self-etch plus hydrophobic adhesive layer, a universal adhesive, and a universal adhesive plus hydrophobic adhesive layer, respectively.Conclusion: An additional hydrophobic adhesive layer was found to have no significant effect on the 18-month clinical performance of two different one-step adhesive systems with and without HEMA.","PeriodicalId":19502,"journal":{"name":"Operative dentistry","volume":" ","pages":"642-654"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Operative dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2341/23-024-C","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the 18-month clinical performance of two different one-step adhesives that were applied alone or with an additional hydrophobic adhesive layer to noncarious cervical lesions.

Methods and materials: One hundred sixty teeth in 31 patients were included in the study. Each patient received at least four restorations. A 2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate (HEMA)-containing one-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil S3 Bond Plus, Kuraray Noritake, Noritake, Japan) and a HEMA-free universal adhesive (G-Premio Bond) were applied to noncarious cervical lesions with or without additional hydrophobic adhesive (Heliobond) randomly. Teeth were restored with a nanohybrid composite. Restorations were evaluated according to FDI criteria at baseline, 6-, 12-, and 18-month recalls. Data were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis and the Friedman analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests (α=0.05).

Results: At 18 months, recall rates were 100%, and there was no significant difference between four different adhesive applications in terms of any criteria (p>0.05). The cumulative retention rates were 92.5%, 92.5%, 97.5%, and 100% for the restorations with one-step self-etch, one-step self-etch plus hydrophobic adhesive layer, a universal adhesive, and a universal adhesive plus hydrophobic adhesive layer, respectively.

Conclusion: An additional hydrophobic adhesive layer was found to have no significant effect on the 18-month clinical performance of two different one-step adhesive systems with and without HEMA.

查看原文本刊更多论文

附加疏水性粘合剂层对 V 类树脂复合修复体临床表现的影响：为期 18 个月的随机临床试验。

研究目的本研究旨在评估两种不同的一步法粘合剂在非龋性牙颈病变中单独使用或附加疏水性粘合剂层的 18 个月临床表现：研究对象包括 31 名患者的 160 颗牙齿。每位患者至少接受了四次修复。将含有 2-羟乙基甲基丙烯酸酯（HEMA）的一步式自酸蚀粘合剂（Clearfil S3 Bond Plus，Kuraray Noritake，Noritake，Japan）和不含 HEMA 的通用粘合剂（G-Premio Bond）随机涂抹在非龋坏的牙颈部病变上，并添加或不添加疏水性粘合剂（Heliobond）。用纳米杂化复合材料对牙齿进行修复。根据 FDI 标准在基线、6 个月、12 个月和 18 个月复查时对修复体进行评估。数据分析采用 Kruskal-Wallis 和 Friedman 方差分析（ANOVA）检验（α=0.05）：18 个月时，回忆率为 100%，四种不同的粘合剂在任何标准上都没有显著差异（P>0.05）。使用一步自酸蚀、一步自酸蚀加疏水粘接层、通用粘接剂和通用粘接剂加疏水粘接层的修复体的累积固位率分别为92.5%、92.5%、97.5%和100%：额外的疏水性粘合剂层对含有或不含 HEMA 的两种不同的一步法粘合剂系统的 18 个月临床表现没有明显影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Operative dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

4.00

自引率

9.10%

发文量

124

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Operative Dentistry is a refereed, international journal published bi-monthly and distributed to subscribers in over 50 countries. In 2012, we printed 84 articles (672 pages). Papers were submitted by authors from 45 countries, in the categories of Clinical Research, Laboratory Research, Clinical Techniques/Case Presentations and Invited Papers, as well as Editorials and Abstracts. One of the strong points of our journal is that our current publication time for accepted manuscripts is 4 to 6 months from the date of submission. Clinical Techniques/Case Presentations have a very quick turnaround time, which allows for very rapid publication of clinical based concepts. We also provide color for those papers that would benefit from its use. The journal does not accept any advertising but you will find postings for faculty positions. Additionally, the journal also does not rent, sell or otherwise allow its subscriber list to be used by any other entity