Dental Caries
Conditions
Keywords
Dental adhesive, adhesive systems, Dental Restoration Failure
Brief summary
This study aims to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of contemporary resin-based adhesive systems by retention rate of resin restorations placed in non carious cervical lesions with four different adhesive strategies: 3 and 2 steps etch-and-rinse adhesive system, 2 and 1 step self-etch adhesive systems.
Detailed description
The etch-and-rinse (3 and 2 steps) and self-etch (1 and 2 steps) adhesive systems allow the bond between the resins restorations with the dental substrates, but they have mechanism of action different. The success of resin composite restorations is reliant upon adhesion to the underlying tooth via adhesive systems. The mechanism of adhesion to enamel and dentine could be involved for one hand, the etching the substrates with 30-40% phosphoric acid, followed by the application of a primer and subsequently an adhesive resin 3 steps etch-and- rinse approach or 2 steps when to combine the primer and adhesive into one bottle. For another hand, the self- etch systems with acid monomers in their primer, allow conditioning the surface without phosphoric acid step. So, they consist of either a self-etching primer accompanied by an adhesive resin applied as a subsequent step (2 steps) or a self-etch adhesive, which does not require a separate primer (1 step).
Interventions
PROCEDUREDental restoration
Methacrylate resins will be used to complement the cavity restoration after of adhesive procedure
PROCEDURE3 step ER
Enamel and dentin will be conditioning with 35% phosphoric acid, then applied primer, and then applied adhesive resin.
PROCEDURE2 step ER
Enamel and dentin will be conditioning with 35% of phosphoric acid, then applied primer/adhesive resin.
PROCEDURE2 step SE
Enamel and dentin will be conditioning with acidic primer, then applied primer/adhesive resin.
PROCEDURE1 step SE
Enamel and dentin will be conditioning with acidic primer/adhesive resin.
Sponsors
Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa
Universidad de Valparaiso
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Good general health, * Patients with acceptable oral hygiene level, * Patients with at least 20 teeth under occlusion. * Patients with at least four non-carious cervical lesions in four different teeth * Patients with maximum of eight lesions that needed to be restored. * These lesions had to be non-carious, non-retentive, deeper than 1 mm, and involve both the enamel and dentin of vital teeth without mobility.
Exclusion criteria
* Patients with extremely poor oral hygiene, * Patients with severe or chronic periodontitis, * Patients with heavy bruxism habits.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Secondary caries | one year | Secondary caries near and/or associated of the dental restorations |
| Retention rate | one year | retention rate of the dental restorations |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Marginal integrity | one year | marginal integrity of the dental restorations |
| Marginal discoloration | one year | Marginal discoloration of the dental restorations |
| post-operative sensitivity | one year | dentin post-operative sensitivity |
Countries
Chile
Outcome results
None listed