Evaluation of Cervical Restorations Performance Using Modified Universal Adhesive Compared to Conventional Universal Adhesive: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Shaalan, Omar Osama; Abouauf, Eman Ali; Dawoud, Basma Gamal

doi:10.21608/adjc.2024.322352.1634

	Evaluation of Cervical Restorations Performance Using Modified Universal Adhesive Compared to Conventional Universal Adhesive: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Advanced Dental Journal
Volume 7, Issue 3, July 2025, Page 411-422 PDF (388.44 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/adjc.2024.322352.1634
View on SCiNiTO
Authors
Omar Osama Shaalan ¹; Eman Ali Abouauf ²; Basma Gamal Dawoud²
¹Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Egypt Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Newgiza University, Egypt
²Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Egypt
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the early clinical performance of a radio-opaque universal adhesive, versus a conventional universal adhesive over 6 months in carious cervical lesions. Materials and methods: Thirty participants with carious cervical lesions were randomly divided into two groups (n=15): Group (1) received Scotchbond™ Universal Plus Adhesive, while Group (2) received Single Bond™ Universal Adhesive. Both materials were applied in etch-and rinse mode and following the manufacturers’ instructions. Restorations were assessed at baseline and after 6 months using the modified USPHS criteria. Results: After 6 months, all restorations in Group (1) scored alpha, while in group (2), one restoration scored charlie after 6 months for postoperative hypersensitivity. There was no statistically significant difference between both materials (P > 0.05). Conclusions: Both adhesives showed comparable clinical performance in cervical restorations after 6-months. Clinical Relevance: Scotchbond Universal Plus Adhesive can provide clinically successful performance, comparable to Single bond Universal Adhesive, when used in cervical restorations.
Keywords
Cervical; class V restorations; clinical performance; Universal adhesive and USPHS criteria


Statistics Article View: 126 PDF Download: 106