HEMA-free versus HEMA-containing adhesive systems: a systematic review.

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Esraa Abdelkhalek, Hamdi H Hamama, Salah H Mahmoud
{"title":"HEMA-free versus HEMA-containing adhesive systems: a systematic review.","authors":"Esraa Abdelkhalek, Hamdi H Hamama, Salah H Mahmoud","doi":"10.1186/s13643-025-02763-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hydrophilic monomer 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA)-free adhesive systems are gaining increasing popularity nowadays. Although the addition of HEMA to dental adhesives improves dentin wettability and resin diffusion into demineralized collagen fibrils, HEMA's high hydrophilicity can lead to hydrolytic degradation of the adhesive interface. Thus, HEMA-free adhesive systems have been developed. Unfortunately, the lack of HEMA in the adhesive composition may lead to a separation phase between hydrophobic and hydrophilic components. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical performance of HEMA-free adhesive systems and compare them with HEMA-containing ones.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An electronic search of The National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE/PubMed) was conducted. Eligibility criteria were reporting empirical data from clinical studies published between 2013 and 2023 about the clinical performance of HEMA-free adhesive systems for direct resin composite restorations. Studies with at least 2-year clinical follow-up done in permanent dentition in any form of cavities were selected. The included studies were assessed for risk of bias using the modified Cochrane Collaboration tool criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The database search returned 147 studies; a total of 7 studies were included in this review; the majority of studies reported no significant difference between the two types of adhesives for the parameter of retention.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>HEMA-free adhesive systems exhibited good clinical performance with regard to retention. There was some concern about their influence on marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration due to the conflicted results reported by the included trials. Thus, the results need to be confirmed with long-term evaluations.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023448952.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"14 1","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11748282/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-025-02763-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Hydrophilic monomer 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA)-free adhesive systems are gaining increasing popularity nowadays. Although the addition of HEMA to dental adhesives improves dentin wettability and resin diffusion into demineralized collagen fibrils, HEMA's high hydrophilicity can lead to hydrolytic degradation of the adhesive interface. Thus, HEMA-free adhesive systems have been developed. Unfortunately, the lack of HEMA in the adhesive composition may lead to a separation phase between hydrophobic and hydrophilic components. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical performance of HEMA-free adhesive systems and compare them with HEMA-containing ones.

Methods: An electronic search of The National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE/PubMed) was conducted. Eligibility criteria were reporting empirical data from clinical studies published between 2013 and 2023 about the clinical performance of HEMA-free adhesive systems for direct resin composite restorations. Studies with at least 2-year clinical follow-up done in permanent dentition in any form of cavities were selected. The included studies were assessed for risk of bias using the modified Cochrane Collaboration tool criteria.

Results: The database search returned 147 studies; a total of 7 studies were included in this review; the majority of studies reported no significant difference between the two types of adhesives for the parameter of retention.

Conclusions: HEMA-free adhesive systems exhibited good clinical performance with regard to retention. There was some concern about their influence on marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration due to the conflicted results reported by the included trials. Thus, the results need to be confirmed with long-term evaluations.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023448952.

不含hema与含hema的粘合剂系统:系统综述。
背景:亲水单体2-羟乙基甲基丙烯酸酯(HEMA)无粘合剂系统越来越受欢迎。虽然在牙科粘合剂中加入HEMA可以改善牙本质的润湿性和树脂向去矿化胶原原纤维中的扩散,但HEMA的高亲水性会导致粘合剂界面的水解降解。因此,开发了不含hema的粘合剂系统。不幸的是,粘合剂组合物中缺乏HEMA可能导致疏水和亲水组分之间的分离阶段。本系统综述的目的是评估无hema黏附系统的临床性能,并将其与含hema黏附系统进行比较。方法:电子检索美国国家医学图书馆(MEDLINE/PubMed)。资格标准报告了2013年至2023年间发表的临床研究的经验数据,这些研究涉及直接树脂复合材料修复体的无hema粘接剂系统的临床性能。在任何形式的蛀牙中进行至少2年临床随访的研究被选中。纳入的研究使用改进的Cochrane协作工具标准评估偏倚风险。结果:数据库检索返回147项研究;本综述共纳入7项研究;大多数研究报告两种粘接剂在固位参数上无显著差异。结论:无hema黏附系统在固位方面具有良好的临床性能。由于纳入的试验报告的结果相互矛盾,因此对它们对边缘适应和边缘变色的影响存在一些担忧。因此,需要用长期评价来证实结果。系统评价注册:PROSPERO CRD42023448952。
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
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信