ONE YEAR CLINICAL PERFORMANCE OF UNIVERSAL ADHESIVE APPLIED IN THREE MODES IN NON-CARIOUS CERVICAL LESIONS (A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL) | ||||
| Alexandria Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 2, Volume 48, Issue 2, August 2023, Page 115-123 PDF (1 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/adjalexu.2022.119535.1252 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Karam Elhedody  1; Waleed Abdelmeged Elmahy2; Dina Nasr 3
| ||||
| 1conservative dentistry department, faculty of dentistry,Alexandria,Egypt | ||||
| 2Professor of Operative Dentistry, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt | ||||
| 3Lecturer in Operative Dentistry, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Introduction: Universal adhesives can be applied in self-etch, selective enamel etch, or etch-and-rinse modes. Universal adhesives can also provide adhesion to multiple substrates other than tooth surfaces, including resin composites, metals, zirconia, and silica- based ceramics. Objectives: To evaluate the one-year clinical performance of a universal adhesive applied in three application modes in comparison to other self-etch and etch and rinse adhesives (control groups) in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions with composite resin. Materials and Methods: Seventy-five restorations in fifteen patients were randomly allocated to five groups (n = 15) according to adhesives and application modes: group I: etch-and-rinse adhesive; group II: self-etch adhesive; group III: universal adhesive in self-etch mode; group IV: universal adhesive in selective enamel etch mode; and group V: universal adhesive in etch-and-rinse mode. The same composite resin (Charisma Diamond) was placed incrementally, finished, and polished. The composite restorations were assessed at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months using the World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria. Groups were compared at each time point regarding all criteria using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: All subjects were recalled after one year, with 100% retention rates in all groups. Using the Kruskal-Wallis test, there were no significant differences between all groups at any recall time regarding fracture, marginal adaptation, marginal staining, and postoperative sensitivity (P > 0.05). None of the five groups showed secondary caries. Conclusion: The three application modes of the universal adhesive and the two control adhesives perform similarly without significant difference between them after one year. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Universal adhesive; application modes; retention; clinical trial; cervical restorations | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 134 PDF Download: 219 |
||||
