These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Clinical long-term retention of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions. A 13 years evaluation.
    Author: van Dijken JW, Sunnegårdh-Grönberg K, Lindberg A.
    Journal: Dent Mater; 2007 Sep; 23(9):1101-7. PubMed ID: 17113139.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical long-term retention to dentin of seven adhesive systems. METHODS: A total of 337 Class V restorations of three three-step etch-and-rinse, one two-step etch-and-rinse and three self-etch adhesive systems were placed in non-carious cervical lesions without intentional enamel involvement. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and then every 6 months during a 13 years follow-up. Dentin bonding efficiency was determined by the percentage of lost restorations. RESULTS: During the 13 years, 275 restorations could be evaluated. The cumulative loss rate at 13 years was 60.3%, with significant different failures rates for the different systems varying between 26.3 and 94.7%. Three materials fulfilled the ADA 18 months full acceptance criteria. Three systems showed already at 18 months or earlier catastrophical debonding rates. The annual failure rates for the three-step etch-and-rinse systems were: Allbond 2 4.1%, Clearfil LB 2.0% and Denthesive 7.3%. For the two-step etch-and-rinse Gluma 2000 6.5%, and for the self-etch systems ART 3.2%, Denthesive 2 5.7% and PUB 3 4.5% CONCLUSION: A continuous degradation of the resin-dentin bond was observed for all bonding systems during the follow-up expressed by the increasing loss rates. A wide variation of dentin bonding effectiveness was seen between the systems independent to adhesion strategy.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]