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, Pages 411-422 PDF (388.44 K) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/adjc.2024.322352.1634 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Omar Osama Shaalan* 1; Eman Ali Abouauf2; 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: 184 PDF Download: 129 |
||
