A prospective, randomized clinical trial of a two-step self-etching vs two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive and SEM margin analysis: Four-year results

Journal of Adhesive Dentistry

Volumn 14, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 585-592

  Boeckler, Annett ^a   Boeckler, Lars ^b   Eppendorf, Kirstin ^b   Schaller, Hans Günter ^a   Gernhardt, Christian R ^a  

^a MARTIN LUTHER UNIVERSITY HALLE WITTENBERG   (Germany)

^b Dental Practice for Operative Dentistry   (Germany)

Author keywords

Clinical study; Composite resin; Flowable composite; Ryge criteria; Self etchinging adhesive

Indexed keywords

ACRYLIC ACID RESIN; ADHESE CEMENT; EXCITE CEMENT; METHACRYLIC ACID DERIVATIVE; RESIN; RESIN CEMENT; TETRIC CERAM;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL ETCHING; DENTAL PROCEDURE; DENTAL SURGERY; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; ENDODONTICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; TOOTH DISEASE;

ACRYLIC RESINS; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL ETCHING; DENTAL LEAKAGE; DENTAL MARGINAL ADAPTATION; DENTAL MODELS; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; METHACRYLATES; MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON, SCANNING; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RESIN CEMENTS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84871012079     PISSN: 14615185     EISSN: 17579988     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3290/j.jad.a27796     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Arhun N, Celik C, Yamanel K. Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: two-year results. Oper Dent; 35: 397-404.
2. Armstrong SR, Vargas MA, Chung I, Pashley DH, Campbell JA, Laffoon JE, Qian F. Resin-dentin interfacial ultrastructure and microtensile dentin bond strength after five-year water storage. Oper Dent 2004; 29: 705-712.
3. Bekes K, Boeckler L, Gernhardt CR, Schaller HG. Clinical performance of a self-etching and a total-etch adhesive system - 2-year results. J Oral Rehabil 2007; 34: 855-861.
4. Bottenberg P, Jacquet W, Alaerts M, Keulemans F. A prospective randomized clinical trial of one bis-GMA-based and two ormocer-based composite restorative systems in class II cavities: Five-year results. J Dent 2009; 37: 198-203.
5. Efes BG, Dörter C, Gömeç Y, Koray F. Two-year clinical evaluation of ormocer and nanofill composite with and without a flowable liner. J Adhes Dent 2006; 8: 119-126.
6. Ermis RB, Kam O, Celik EU, Temel UB. Clinical evaluation of a two-step etch&rinse and a two-step self-etch adhesive system in Class II restorations: two-year results. Oper Dent 2009; 34: 656-663.
7. Ernst CP, Canbek K, Aksogan K, Willershausen B. Two-year clinical performance of a packable posterior composite with and without a flowable composite liner. Clin Oral Investig 2003; 7: 129-134.
8. Frankenberger R, Tay FR. Self-etch vs etch-and-rinse adhesives: effect of thermo-mechanical fatigue loading on marginal quality of bonded resin composite restorations. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 397-412.
9. Gaengler P, Hoyer I, Montag R. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: the 10-year report. J Adhes Dent 2001; 3: 185-194.
10. Gaengler P, Hoyer I, Montag R, Gaebler P. Micromorphological evaluation of posterior composite restorations - a 10-year report. J Oral Rehabil 2004; 31: 991-1000.
11. Gordan VV, Mondragon E, Watson RE, Garvan C, Mjör IA. A clinical evaluation of a self-etching primer and a giomer restorative material: results at eight years. J Am Dent Assoc 2007; 138: 621-627.
12. Kahler B, Kotousov A, Borkowski K. Effect of material properties on stresses at the restoration-dentin interface of composite restorations during polymerization. Dent Mater 2006; 22: 942-947.
13. Krämer N, Reinelt C, Richter G, Petschelt A, Frankenberger R. Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in Class II cavities: clinical results and margin analysis after four years. Dent Mater 2009; 25: 750-759.
14. Krithikadatta J. Clinical effectiveness of contemporary dentin bonding agents. J Conserv Dent; 13: 173-183.
15. Lopes LG, Cefaly DF, Franco EB, Mondelli RF, Lauris JR, Navarro MF. Clinical evaluation of two "packable" posterior composite resins: twoyear results. Clin Oral Investig 2003; 7: 123-128.
16. Mahmoud SH, El-Embaby AE, AbdAllah AM, Hamama HH. Two-year clinical evaluation of ormocer, nanohybrid and nanofill composite restorative systems in posterior teeth. J Adhes Dent 2008; 10: 315-322.
17. Manhart J, Chen HY, Hickel R. Clinical evaluation of the posterior composite Quixfil in class I and II cavities: 4-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. J Adhes Dent 2009; 12: 237-243.
18. Monteiro PM, Manso MC, Gavinha S, Melo P. Two-year clinical evaluation of packable and nanostructured resin-based composites placed with two techniques. J Am Dent Assoc; 141: 319-329.
19. Oberlander H, Hiller KA, Thonemann B, Schmalz G. Clinical evaluation of packable composite resins in Class-II restorations. Clin Oral Investig 2001; 5: 102-107.
20. Perdigao J, Geraldeli S, Hodges JS. Total-etch versus self-etch adhesive: effect on postoperative sensitivity. J Am Dent Assoc 2003; 134: 1621-1629.
21. Perdigao J, Dutra-Correa M, Castilhos N, Carmo AR, Anauate-Netto C, Cordeiro HJ, Amore R, Lewgoy HR. One-year clinical performance of selfetch adhesives in posterior restorations. Am J Dent 2007; 20: 125-133.
22. Ryge G, Snyder M. Evaluating the clinical quality of restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1973; 87: 369-377.
23. Schirrmeister JF, Huber K, Hellwig E, Hahn P. Four-year evaluation of a resin composite including nanofillers in posterior cavities. J Adhes Dent 2009; 11: 399-404.
24. Schuckar M, Geurtsen W. Proximo-cervical adaptation of Class II-composite restorations after thermocycling: a quantitative and qualitative study. J Oral Rehabil 1997; 24: 766-775.
25. Swift EJ, Jr., Ritter AV, Heymann HO, Sturdevant JR, Wilder AD, Jr. 36- month clinical evaluation of two adhesives and microhybrid resin composites in Class I restorations. Am J Dent 2008; 21: 148-152.
26. van Dijken JW, Pallesen U. Clinical performance of a hybrid resin composite with and without an intermediate layer of flowable resin composite: A 7-year evaluation. Dent Mater 2010; 27: 150-156.
27. van Dijken JW, Pallesen U. Four-year clinical evaluation of Class II nanohybrid resin composite restorations bonded with a one-step self-etch and a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive. J Dent 2011; 39: 16-25.
28. Van Landuyt KL, Snauwaert J, De Munck J, Peumans M, Yoshida Y, Poitevin A, Coutinho E, Suzuki K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Systematic review of the chemical composition of contemporary dental adhesives. Biomaterials 2007; 28: 3757-3785.
29. Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Verschueren M, Gladys S, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Clinical status of ten dentin adhesive systems. J Dent Res 1994; 73: 1690-1702.
30. Van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, Yoshida Y, Mine A, M Jd, K LV. State of the art of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 17-28.
31. Yoshida Y, Nagakane K, Fukuda R, Nakayama Y, Okazaki M, Shintani H, Inoue S, Tagawa Y, Suzuki K, De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B. Comparative study on adhesive performance of functional monomers. J Dent Res 2004; 83: 454-458.