Clinical effectiveness of a one-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions at 2 years Three-year clinical performance of a HEMA-free one-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions. Randomized clinical trial of four adhesion strategies: 18-month results. Five-year clinical performance of a HEMA-free one-step self-etch adhesive in noncarious cervical lesions Long-term dentin retention of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions. A three-year clinical evaluation of a one-step self-etch and a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions. Four-year clinical evaluation of Class II nano-hybrid resin composite restorations bonded with a one-step self-etch and a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive. The clinical effectiveness of various adhesive systems: an 18-month evaluation. Adhesion of 10-MDP containing resin cements to dentin with and without the etch-and-rinse technique Eight-year randomized clinical evaluation of Class II nanohybrid resin composite restorations bonded with a one-step self-etch or a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Bond strength of adhesive resin cement with different adhesive systems Bonding Performance of a Multimode Adhesive to Artificially-induced Caries-affected Primary Dentin. An 18-months' evaluation of self-etch and etch & rinse adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions A 13-year clinical evaluation of two three-step etch-and-rinse adhesives in non-carious class-V lesions Effect of haemostatic agent application on the shear bond strength of contemporary/multi-mode adhesive systems. A randomized, controlled clinical trial of one-step self-etching adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions. Bonding of simplified adhesive systems to caries-affected dentin of primary teeth.
A 2-year r and omized , controlled prospect i ve study evaluated the clinical effectiveness of a one-step self-etch adhesive and a “ gold-st and ard ” three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive in non-carious Class-V lesions . The null hypothesis tested was that the one-step self-etch adhesive does perform clinical ly equally well as the three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive .  A total of 161 lesions in 26 patients were restored with Clearfil AP-X ( Kuraray ) .  The restorations were bonded either with the “ all-in-one ” adhesive Clearfil S3 Bond ( Kuraray ) or with the three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive Optibond FL ( Kerr ) . The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months , 1 and 2 years , regarding their retention , marginal adapation , marginal discoloration , caries occurrence , preservation of tooth vitality and post-operative sensivity . Retention loss , severe marginal defects and /or discoloration that needed intervention ( repair or replacement ) and the occurrence of caries were considered as clinical failures . The recall rate at 2 years was 93.8 % . Only one Clearfil S3 Bond restoration was lost at the 2-year recall . All other restorations were clinical ly acceptable . The number of restorations with defect-free margins decreased severely during the 2-year study period ( to 6.7 % and 25.3 % for Clearfil S3 Bond and Optibond FL , respectively ) . The Clearfil S3 Bond restorations presented significantly more small marginal defects at the enamel side than the Optibond FL restorations ( Clearfil S3 Bond : 93.3 % ; Optibond FL : 73.3 % ; p = 0.000 ) . Superficial marginal discoloration increased in both groups ( to 53.3 % and 36 % for Clearfil S3 Bond and Optibond FL , respectively ) and was also more pronounced in the Clearfil S3 Bond group ( p = 0.007 ) . After 2 years , the simplified one-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil S3 Bond and the three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive Optibond FL were clinical ly equally successful , even though both adhesives were characterized by progressive degradation in marginal integrity .  Clearfil S3 Bond exhibited more small enamel marginal defects and superficial marginal discolorations Despite the fact that one-step adhesives are currently used routinely in clinical practice , long-term studies on their clinical performance are scarce . The objective of this r and omized controlled clinical trial was to test the hypothesis that a 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA)-free one-step self-etch adhesive performs worse than a conventional multistep etch- and -rinse adhesive .  Two-hundred and seventy-six non-carious cervical lesions in 52 patients were restored with a micro-hybrid composite  ( Gradia Direct ; GC ) . These restorations were bonded in r and om order either with the HEMA-free one-step adhesive G-Bond ( GC ) or with the ' gold-st and ard ' ( control ) three-step adhesive Optibond FL ( Kerr ) . The restorations were evaluated after 6 , 12 , 24 , and 36 months of clinical service regarding retention , marginal adaptation , microleakage , caries occurrence , and sensitivity . After a medium-long period of 3 yr , similar success in clinical performance was observed for the simplified all-in-one adhesive and the conventional three-step adhesive . However , the one-step adhesive exhibited significantly more incisal marginal defects and discolorations . Whereas marginal degradation appeared to arrest for the multistep etch- and -rinse adhesive after 12 months , the enamel margins of the restorations bonded with the one-step self-etch adhesive continued to deteriorate . These incisal marginal defects were , however , small and could easily be removed by polishing . For both adhesives , large and sclerosed lesions appeared to be at higher risk of retention loss STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM With Institutional Review Board approval , 39 patients who needed restoration of noncarious cervical lesions ( NCCLs ) were enrolled in this study . A total of 125 NCCLs were selected and r and omly assigned to four groups : 1 ) a three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive , Adper Scotchbond Multi- Purpose ( MP , 3 M ESPE , St Paul , MN , USA ) ; 2 ) a two-step etch- and -rinse adhesive , Adper Single Bond Plus ( SB , 3 M ESPE ) ; 3 ) a two-step self-etch adhesive , Adper Scotchbond SE ( SE , 3 M ESPE ) ; and 4 ) a one-step self-etch adhesive , Adper Easy Bond ( EB , 3 M ESPE ) . A nanofilled composite resin was used for all restorations . Restorations were evaluated at six months and 18 months using modified U.S. Public Health Service ( USPHS ) parameters . RESULTS At six months after initial placement , 107 restorations ( 85.6 % recall rate ) were evaluated . At 18 months , 94 restorations ( 75.2 % recall rate ) were available for evaluation . The 6 mo/18 mo overall retention rates ( % ) were 100/90.9 for MP ; 100/91.7 for SB ; 100/90.9 for SE ; and 96.4/92.3 for EB with no statistical difference between any pair of groups at each recall . Sensitivity to air decreased significantly for all adhesives from the preoperative to the postoperative stage and was stable thereafter . Interfacial staining did not change statistically from baseline to six months ; however , interfacial staining at the enamel margins was statistically worse at 18 months than at baseline for the two self-etch adhesives EB and SE . Marginal adaptation was statistically worse at 18 months compared with baseline only for EB . This tendency was already significant at the six-month recall . CONCLUSION Although 18-month retention was similar for the different adhesion strategies , enamel marginal deficiencies were more prevalent for the self-etch adhesives Objectives The objective of this r and omized controlled trial was to evaluate the clinical performance of a 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA)-free one-step adhesive . Material s and methods Two hundred sixty-seven cervical lesions in 52 patients were restored with the composite Gradia Direct ( GC ) , bonded with either the one-step self-etch adhesive G-Bond ( GC ) or the three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive Optibond FL ( Kerr ) in a r and om order . The restorations were evaluated for retention , marginal integrity , marginal discoloration , and caries occurrence after 5 years . Specific statistics were used to account for the clustered data ( multiple restorations per patient ) . Results The clinical success rate for G-Bond ( 87.4 % ) was not significantly different from that of Optibond FL ( 90.9 % ) . Both adhesives showed progressive marginal deterioration , but G-Bond exhibited more small enamel defects and marginal discoloration , and unlike previous recalls , several restorations failed because of deep microleakage . Large sclerotic lesions were a significant risk factor for retention loss with G-Bond . Irrespective of the adhesive , almost all restorations with retention loss were located in the lower jaw . Conclusion After 5 years of clinical service , restorations bonded with the HEMA-free one-step adhesive did not need repair or replacement more often than those with the three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive , and both adhesives had a high retention rate ( > 90 % ) . There were indications that G-Bond did not (self-)etch enough in some clinical situations , as G-Bond exhibited more incisal defects and marginal discolorations , and sclerotic lesions were at higher risk of retention loss . Clinical relevance The clinical performance of the HEMA-free one-step adhesive was clinical ly acceptable after 5 years OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical long-term retention to dentin of seven adhesive systems . METHODS A total of 270 Class V restorations of four etch- and -rinse , one self-etch adhesive system and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement were placed in non-carious cervical lesions without intentional enamel involvement . The restorations were evaluated at baseline , 6 , 12 , 18 , and 24 months and then every year during a 13-year follow-up . Dentin bonding efficiency was determined by the percentage of lost restorations . RESULTS During the 13 years , 215 restorations could be evaluated . The cumulative loss rate at 13 years was 53.0 % , with significant different failures rates for the different systems varying between 35.6 and 86.8 % . Four systems fulfilled the ADA 18-month full acceptance retention criteria . Two systems showed at 18 months and earlier high debonding rates . The annual failure rates for the etch- and -rinse systems were Optibond 3.1 % , Permagen 13.0 % , Scotchbond MP 4.8 % , Syntac classic 2.8 % ; for the self-etch system P&S 4.4 % ; and the resin-modified glass ionomer cement Vitremer 2.7 % . CONCLUSION It can be concluded that all systems showed a continuous degradation of the bond with a wide variation , which was independent of the adhesion strategy . Three bonding systems showed a cumulative failure rate after 13 years between 36 and 41 % with the best retention for the resin-modified glass ionomer cement and a four-step etch- and -rinse system OBJECTIVES The aim of the study was to assess a one-step self-etch adhesive ( Futurabond M , 1-SE ) and a two-step etch- and -rinse adhesive ( Solobond M , 2-ER ) used in combination with the nano-hybrid composite ( Amaris ) in a prospect i ve clinical study on non-carious cervical lesions . METHODS 110 restorations were placed in 40 patients and grade d over 36 months according to aesthetical , functional and biological criteria ( Clinical Oral Investigations 2007;11:5 ) . The four-step etch- and -rinse adhesive Syntac classic ( 4-ER ) combined with the nano-hybrid composite Tetric EvoCeram was used as a control . Cumulative failure rates ( CFR ) , retention rates and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were calculated for each observation period . RESULTS After 3 years , the CFR of 33.3 % in the 2-ER group was significantly higher compared to those of the 1-SE group ( 9.1 % , p = 0.019 ) and of the 4-ER group ( 8.3 % , p = 0.035 ) . Additionally , retention rates in the 1-SE and the 4-ER groups were higher compared to 2-ER ( p = 0.012 each ) after 36 months . Annual failure rates ranged between 2.8 % for 4-ER , 3.0 % for 1-SE and 11.1 % for 2-ER . During the study , restorations in all groups showed progressive marginal deterioration within the limits of clinical acceptance . After 3 years , restorations in the 2-ER and the 4-ER group showed more small defects at dentin than at enamel margins . CONCLUSIONS The 1-SE group was clinical ly as successful as the 4-ER , with both performing better than the 2-ER group . Futurabond M/Amaris can be recommended for the restoration of sclerotic non-carious cervical lesions . CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Number protocol 192/2008 OBJECTIVE The objective of this prospect i ve clinical trial was to evaluate the 4-year clinical performance of an ormocer-based nano-hybrid resin composite ( Ceram X ; Dentsply/DeTrey ) in Class II restorations placed with a one-step self-etch ( Xeno III ; Dentsply/DeTrey ) and two-step etch- and -rinse adhesive ( Ivoclar Vivadent ) . METHODS Seventy-eight participants received at r and om at least two , as similar as possible , Class II restorations of the nano-hybrid resin composite bonded with either a single step self-etch adhesive or a control 2-step etch- and -rinse adhesive . The 165 restorations were evaluated using slightly modified USPHS criteria at baseline and then yearly during 4 years . RESULTS 162 restorations were evaluated at 4 years . Postoperative sensitivity was observed in 6 patients ( 3 Xeno III , 3 Exite ) between 1 and 3 weeks . Eleven failed restorations ( 6.8 % ) were observed during the follow up . Seven in the one-step self-etch adhesive group ( 7.7 % ) and four in the 2-step etch- and -rinse group ( 5.6 % ) . This result ed in non-significant different annual failure rates of 1.9 % and 1.4 % , respectively . Fracture of restoration was the main reason for failure . CONCLUSION The ormocer-based nano-hybrid resin composite showed a good clinical performance in Class II cavities during the 4 year evaluation . No significant difference was seen in overall clinical effectiveness between the two adhesives The aim of this clinical trial was to compare the clinical performance of three different adhesive systems over 18 months in noncarious cervical lesions ( NCCLs ) . Thirty patients , with at least three noncarious cervical lesions , were enrolled in the study . One operator r and omly restored a total of 90 lesions with resin composite ( Herculite XRV ) . The restorations were bonded with either Optibond FL ( OF ) , three-step total-etch ; Optibond Solo Plus ( OS ) , two-step total-etch ; or Optibond All-In-One ( OA ) , one step self-etch . The restorations were clinical ly evaluated at baseline and after six , 12 , and 18 months using the eight United States Public Health Services criteria . Data were analyzed using Friedman and Wilcoxon signed ranks tests ( p<0.05 ) . After 18 months , the retention rate was ( OF ) 96.5 % , ( OS ) 93.1 % , and ( OA ) 89.7 % . Differences among the three adhesive systems for evaluated criteria were not observed in comparison of the mean Alfa score percentages . There was a significant increase in marginal discoloration for ( OA ) adhesive  after 18 months compared with baseline ( p=0.011 ) . Other restoration criteria had no statistically significant differences among the three adhesives ( p>0.05 ) . With the exception of marginal discoloration , the clinical effectiveness of three types of adhesive systems in NCCLs was acceptable after 18 months . However , using the one-step self-etch adhesive may lead to some marginal discolorations PURPOSE This study evaluated the adhesion of 10-MDP containing self-etch and self-adhesive resin cements to dentin with and without the use of etch- and -rinse technique . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Human third molars ( N=180 ) were r and omly divided into 6 groups ( n=30 per group ) . Conventional ( Panavia F2.0 , Kuraray-PAN ) and self-adhesive resin cements ( Clearfil SA , Kuraray-CSA ) were bonded to dentin surfaces either after application of 3-step etch- and -rinse ( 35 % H3PO4 + ED Primer ) or two-step self-etch adhesive resin ( Clearfil SE Bond ) . Specimens were subjected to shear bond strength test using the universal testing machine ( 0.5 mm/min ) . The failure types were analyzed using a stereomicroscope and quality of hybrid layer was observed under a scanning electron microscope . The data ( MPa ) were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey 's tests ( α=.05 ) . RESULTS Overall , PAN adhesive cement showed significantly higher mean bond strength ( 12.5 ± 2.3 - 14.1 ± 2.4 MPa ) than CSA cement ( 9.3 ± 1.4 - 13.9 ± 1.9 MPa ) ( P<.001 ) . Adhesive failures were more frequent in CSA cement groups when used in conjunction with two-step self-adhesive ( 68 % ) or no adhesive at all ( 66 % ) . Hybrid layer quality was inferior in CSA compared to PAN cement in all conditions . CONCLUSION In clinical situations where bonding to dentin substrate is crucial , both conventional and self-adhesive resin cements based on 10-MDP can benefit from etch- and -rinse technique to achieve better quality of adhesion in the early clinical period Objectives The aim of this study is to observe the durability of Class II nanohybrid resin composite restorations  , placed with two different adhesive systems , in an 8-year follow-up . Methods Seventy-eight participants received at r and om at least two Class II restorations of the ormocer-based nanohybrid resin composite ( Ceram X ) bonded with either a one-step self-etch adhesive ( Xeno III ) or a control two-step etch- and -rinse adhesive ( Excite ) . The 165 restorations were evaluated using slightly modified United States Public Health Services ( USPHS ) criteria at baseline and then yearly during 8 years . Results One hundred and fifty-eight restorations were evaluated after 8 years . Three participants with five restorations ( three Xeno III , two Excite ) were registered as dropouts . Twenty-one failed restorations ( 13.3 % ) were observed during the follow-up . Twelve in the one-step self-etch adhesive group ( 13.5 % ) and nine in the two-step etch- and -rinse group ( 13.0 % ) . This result ed in nonsignificant different annual failure rates of 1.69 and 1.63 % , respectively . Fracture of restoration was the main reason for failure . Conclusion Good clinical performance was shown during the 8-year evaluation and no significant difference in overall clinical performance between the two adhesives . Fracture was the main reason for failure . Clinical relevance The one-step self-etch adhesive showed a good long-term clinical effectiveness in combination with the nanohybrid resin composite in Class II restorations Background To assess the immediate bond strength of a dual-cure adhesive resin cement to the hybridized dentin with different bonding systems . Material and Methods Fifty-six healthy human molars were r and omly divided into 7 groups ( n=8 ) . After 3 longitudinal sections , the central cuts were included in PVC matrix and were su bmi tted to dentin hybridization according to the groups : G1 - etch & rinse system with 3-step ( Apder ™ Scotchbond ™ Multi- Purpose , 3 M ESPE ) , G2 - etch & rinse system with 3-step ( Optibond ™ FL , Kerr ) , G3 - etch & rinse system with 3-step ( All-Bond 3 ® , Bisco ) , G4 - etch & rinse simplified system ( Adper ™ Single Bond 2 , 3 M ESPE ) , G5 - self-etching system with one step ( Bond Force , Tokuyama ) , G6 - universal system in moist dentin ( Single Bond Universal , 3 M ESPE ) , G7 - universal system in dry dentin ( Single Bond Universal , 3 M ESPE ) . Then all groups received the cementing of a self-adhesive resin cement cylinder ( Duo-link , Bisco ) made from a polypropylene matrix . In the evaluation of bond strength , the sample s were subjected to the microshear test and evaluated according to the fracture pattern by optical microscopy . Results The Kruskal-Wallis test suggests a statistically significant difference between groups ( p=0,039 ) , and Tukey for multiple comparisons , indicating a statistically significant difference between G3 and G4 ( p<0.05 ) . It was verified high prevalence of adhesive failures , followed by mixed failure and cohesive in dentin . Conclusions The technique and the system used to dentin hybridization are able to affect the immediate bond strength of resin cement dual adhesive . Key words : Adhesion , adhesive resin cement , adhesive systems , microshear PURPOSE To investigate the bonding of a new universal adhesive applied using different etching strategies on sound and caries-affected dentin of primary teeth . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Flat dentin surfaces from 50 primary molars were r and omly assigned to 10 groups according to substrate ( sound dentin [ SD ] vs caries-affected dentin [ CAD ] pH cycled for 14 days ) and bonding approach ( Scotchbond Universal Adhesive : self-etching , vs dry or wet-bonding etch- and -rinse strategies ; Adper Single Bond Plus [ two-step etch- and -rinse adhesive ] and Clearfil SE Bond [ two-step self-etching system ] as controls ) . After 24 h of water storage , bonded sticks with cross-sectional areas of 0.8 mm2 were tested for microtensile bond strength ( μTBS ) . Two sticks from each tooth were immersed in silver nitrate solution in order to evaluate nanoleakage ( NL ) with SEM . The μTBS means were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey 's tests . For NL , the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were used ( α = 0.05 ) . RESULTS The influence of the etching strategy on the bonding performance of the universal adhesive was substrate dependent . The self-etching approach result ed in lower μTBS values and higher silver nitrate uptake into hybrid layers for Scotchbond Universal Adhesive on SD , while no difference among experimental groups was observed in CAD . CONCLUSION It is preferable to use the universal adhesive following either a dry- or wet-bonding etch- and -rinse approach on both sound and caries-affected primary dentin Objective . In this intra-individual comparison ( an 18-months ' r and omized , controlled prospect i ve study ) , we evaluated the clinical performance of one self-etch and one “ etch & rinse ” adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions . Methods . Twenty-five patients with at least two pairs of similar-sized non-carious cervical lesions participated . Seventy-eight restorations were placed ; 39 with etch & rinse ( Single-Bond ) and 39 with self-etch ( Adper Prompt ) . Both adhesives were combined with the microfilled resin composite Filtek-A110 . The restorations were evaluated at baseline , 6 , 12 , and 18 months according to slightly modified USPHS criteria . Statistical differences between the adhesives was tested with McNemar 's test and clinical degradation over time for each material with the Fisher exact test ( α=0.05 ) . Results . Thirty pairs were evaluated at 12 and 18 months . Two self-etch restorations were lost after 18 months . Nine Adper Prompt and four Single-Bond restorations scored bravo for marginal adaptation at 18 months ( p<0.05 ) . Nine Adper Prompt and three Single-Bond restorations scored bravo for marginal discoloration ( p<0.05 ) . Conclusions . Both adhesive systems showed acceptable clinical retention rates according to the ADA full acceptance criteria for enamel-bonding systems in class V non-carious lesions . The self-etch adhesive showed a faster progressive marginal degradation This 13-year r and omized clinical trial compared the clinical effectiveness of two three-step etch- and -rinse adhesives in combination with a hybrid , stiffer composite versus a micro-filled , more flexible composite . The influence of composite stiffness on the clinical performance of one of the adhesives was assessed as well . One hundred and forty-two non-carious cervical lesions were restored with composites with contrasting stiffness . Seventy-one patients r and omly received two cervical restorations placed following two out of three adhesive procedures : ( 1 ) the three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive Permaquick applied with the stiff micro-hybrid composite Amelogen Hybrid ( PMQ-H , Ultradent ) , ( 2 ) Permaquick applied with the more flexible micro-filled Amelogen Microfill ( PMQ-M , Ultradent ) , or ( 3 ) the “ gold-st and ard ” three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive Optibond FL applied with the micro-hybrid composite Prodigy ( OFL-P , Kerr ) . The restorations were evaluated after 6 months , 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 7 , and 13 years of clinical service regarding their retention , marginal integrity and discoloration , caries occurrence , preservation of tooth vitality , and post-operative sensitivity . Retention loss , severe marginal defects , and /or discoloration that needed intervention ( repair or replacement ) and the occurrence of caries were considered as clinical failures . The recall rate at 13 years was 77 % . Bond degradation after 13 years was mainly characterized by a further increase in the presence of small but clinical ly acceptable marginal defects and superficial marginal discoloration . Twelve percent of the OFL-P restorations were clinical ly unacceptable . In the PMQ group , 22 % of the PMQ-M restorations and 26 % of the PMQ-H restorations needed repair or replacement . Regarding the clinical failure rate , Optibond FL scored significantly better than Permaquick ( McNemar ; p = 0.015 ) . No statistically significant differences were found between the micro-filled and the hybrid composite for each of the parameters evaluated ( McNemar , p > 0.05 ) . After 13 years of clinical functioning , the clinical effectiveness of the three adhesive/composite combinations remained highly acceptable OBJECTIVES The aim was to determine the effect of blood contamination and haemostatic agent application on the shear bond strength ( SBS ) of different adhesives to dentin . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Seventy-two extracted human molars were used in this study . Teeth were mounted acrylic in moulds . Mesial and distal surfaces were removed to obtain flat dentin surfaces ( n=144 ) and grinded with a 600 grit s and paper . The sample s were r and omly divided into three main groups ( N=48 ) based on the adhesive system and application procedures . GROUP 1 : No contamination ( control ) , GROUP 2 : Blood contamination , GROUP 3 : Blood Contamination+Haemostatic agent application . Each group was further divided into four subgroups : SUBGROUP I : Single Bond 2 ( etch- and -rinse ) Subgroup II : Clearfil SE Bond ( two-step self-etch ) Subgroup III : Single Bond Universal ( multimode , etch- and -rinse ) subgroup IV : Single Bond Universal ( multimode , all-in-one self-etch ) ( n=12 ) . Resin cylinders ( Filtek Z550 ) were bonded to the dentin surfaces according to the manufacturers ' instructions . A shear load was applied to the specimens using universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/min until failure . Data were analyzed statistically ( p<0.05 ) . RESULTS Statistically significant differences were observed between no contamination ( control ) and blood + haemostatic agent contamination groups for both Single Bond 2 ( etch- and -rinse ) and Single Bond Universal ( multimode , all-in-one self-etch ) ( p<0.05 ) . When the adhesive systems were compared to each other , no statistically significant differences were found in all contamination groups and control group for the mean SBS values ( p>0.05 ) . CONCLUSION When blood contamination is inevitable two step self- etching adhesive systems may be the choice of adhesive system in terms of shear bond strength PURPOSE To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of two different one-step self-etching adhesives . METHODS Two single-step self-etching adhesive systems , Clearfil Tri-S Bond and G-Bond , were evaluated . As a control , a two-step self-etching adhesive system , Clearfil SE Bond , was used . The teeth to be restored were r and omly assigned . The resin composite used to restore the teeth was Clearfil AP-X. The three adhesive systems were evaluated by Modified USPHS at baseline , 3 months , 6 months , and 12 months . The evaluation consisted of retention rate , color match , marginal discoloration ( interfacial staining ) , marginal adaptation ( integrity ) , wear , post-operative sensitivity , caries recurrence , and other failures . Changes over time and across groups were evaluated statistically using generalized estimating equations . RESULTS During the 12-month study period , no statistical differences were observed among the three groups ( P > 0.05 ) in retention rate , color match , marginal discoloration ( interfacial staining ) , marginal adaptation ( integrity ) . No wear , post-operative sensitivity , caries recurrence , or other failures were detected in any groups . The two one-step self-etching adhesives tested showed good clinical performance at the end of 12 months PURPOSE To evaluate the bonding of simplified adhesive systems to sound and caries-affected dentin of primary teeth with microtensile ( µTBS ) and nanoleakage ( NL ) tests . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Occlusal cavities were prepared in 36 sound second primary molars . Half of the specimens were su bmi tted to pH cycling to simulate caries-affected dentin . Teeth were r and omly restored with one of three material s : the etch- and -rinse adhesive system Adper Single Bond 2 ( SB ) , the two-step self-etching adhesive system Adper SE Plus ( SE ) , and the one-step self-etching adhesive system Adper Easy One ( EASY ) . After storage for 24 h , specimens with cross-sectional areas of 0.8 mm2 were prepared for microtensile testing ( 1 mm/min ) . One stick from each tooth was immersed in silver nitrate solution ( 24 h ) and allowed to develop for 8 h in order to score the nano leakage with SEM . The fracture pattern was evaluated using a stereomicroscope ( 400X ) . The µTBS means were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey 's post-hoc test . For NL , the Kruskal- Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were used ( α < 0.05 ) . RESULTS SB ( 35.5 ± 3.5 ) showed the highest µTBS value to sound dentin , followed by EASY ( 26.3 ± 1.9 ) and SE ( 18.2 ± 6.5 ) ( p < 0.05 ) . No difference among material s was observed for caries-affected dentin ( SB : 17.8 ± 4.2 ; SE : 13.9 ± 3.2 ; EASY : 14.4 ± 4.2 , p > 0.05 ) . For all groups , adhesive/mixed fracture prevailed . Caries affected dentin promoted silver nitrate uptake into the adhesive interface ; however , with SE , the nano leakage was more pronounced than in the other adhesive systems , even in sound dentin . CONCLUSION Caries-affected dentin negatively influences the bond strength and nano leakage of the two-step etch- and -rinse and one-step self-etching adhesive systems tested in primary teeth
There is not enough evidence to support one adhesive or bonding strategy over another for treatment of NCCLs .
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Studies with low overall risk of bias demonstrated good clinical performance for adhesives with all four bonding strategies .
However , included studies showed wide variation between adhesives of the same category
OBJECTIVES To establish whether simplified adhesives ( self-etch ) are as clinical ly effective as conventional adhesives ( etch- and -rinse ) with multiple application steps for treatment of non-carious cervical lesions ( NCCLs ) .
NULL HYPOTHESIS there is no difference in the clinical effectiveness of the four different bonding strategies : Three-step etch- and -rinse ; Two-step etch- and -rinse ; Two-step self-etch ; One-step self-etch for treatment of NCCLs .