Three-year evaluation of different adhesion strategies in non-carious cervical lesion restorations

a randomized clinical trial

Authors

  • Diego Felipe Mardegan Gonçalves Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba, Departamento de Odontologia Preventiva e Restauradora, Araçatuba http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3885-9000
  • Mirela Sanae Shinohara Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba, Departamento de Odontologia Preventiva e Restauradora, Araçatuba http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8147-7262
  • Paulo Roberto Marão de Andrade Carvalho Centro Universitário São Lucas, Porto Velho http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8004-9741
  • Fernanda de Souza e Silva Ramos Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba, Departamento de Odontologia Preventiva e Restauradora, Araçatuba http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2222-2424
  • Laryssa de Castro Oliveira Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba, Departamento de Odontologia Preventiva e Restauradora, Araçatuba http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7689-4969
  • Érika Mayumi Omoto Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba, Departamento de Odontologia Preventiva e Restauradora, Araçatuba http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2685-6259
  • Ticiane Cestari Fagundes Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba, Departamento de Odontologia Preventiva e Restauradora, Araçatuba http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3418-0498

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2021-0192%20

Keywords:

Acid etchin, Adhesive systems, Non-carious cervical lesion

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) restored with different adhesion strategies. Methodology: This is a prospective, randomized, double-blind, split-mouth study. An adhesive restorative system (Single Bond Universal/Filtek Z350XT – SBU) was evaluated both without and with selective enamel conditioning (E-SBU), resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (Vitremer; RMGIC), and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid pretreatment (EDTA; E-RMGIC). In total, 200 restorations, placed in 50 patients, were evaluated at baseline and at a 3-year follow-up using the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Data were analyzed using the two-proportion equality test, multinomial logistic regression, Wilcoxon test, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Results: In total, 42 (84%) patients returned for the 3-year follow-up. SBU showed restoration losses statistically different from RMGIC. Retention was also statistically different in SBU between baseline and the 3-year follow-up. Marginal defects and surface texture were statistically significant for all groups in the period studied, except for the surface texture of SBU and the marginal integrity in E-RMGIC. We observed no statistically significant difference in wear, secondary caries, anatomical form, surface staining, and color over time. Recession degree was the only factor to influence retention rates. Cumulative survival (%) was 89, 98, 98, and 95.3, for SBU, SE-SBU, RMGIC, and E-RMGIC, respectively, without significant differences among them. There was a statistically significant difference between survival curves; however, multiple comparison procedures found no statistical differences. Conclusion: Selective enamel etching affected the retention of non-carious cervical restorations. Adhesion using EDTA and resin-modified glass-ionomer cements delayed marginal defects over time. The degree of gingival recession influenced retention rates. Resin composite restorations showed initial marginal defects, and ionomer restorations, reduced surface luster. EDTA pre-treatment followed by resin-modified glass-ionomer cements may be a promising adhesion strategy for NCCL restorations.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2021-11-03 — Updated on 2021-11-03

Versions

Issue

Section

Original Articles

How to Cite

Three-year evaluation of different adhesion strategies in non-carious cervical lesion restorations: a randomized clinical trial. (2021). Journal of Applied Oral Science, 29, e20210192. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2021-0192