Two-year Clinical Evaluation of Three Adhesives in Class V Restorations

Objectives: To compare the clinical performance of two self-etching dental adhesives to a one bottle total-etch dental adhesive by restoring non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs). Methods: 50 adult subjects 19 years or older were recruited after obtaining informed consent. Each subject at least 3 NCCLs with minimum depth of 1.5mm. The teeth were restored randomly with Single Bond Plus/SBP, Easy Bond/EB or Scotchbond SE/SE dental adhesives and Filtek Supreme Plus/3M ESPE composite resin. Teeth were isolated (rubber dam) and cleaned (flour of pumice). A short enamel bevel was made with an OS2 bur (Brasseler/GA) and high speed handpiece (NSK/Japan). All adhesives were applied following manufacturers' directions. Proper composite shade was selected, placed in 2mm increments and light-cured (G-Light/GC America/Chicago/IL/>700mW/cm²). Restorations were finished with burs (7901/OS2/Brasseler) and polished (Sof-Lex/3M ESPE, Enhance/PoGo.Dentsply Caulk). Digital images were made before and after preparation, after finishing and at each recall. Patients were evaluated at baseline (2weeks after restoration), 6, 12 and 24 months. Each evaluation included retention, anatomic form, color match, margin integrity, margin discoloration, surface roughness, secondary caries, staining, gingival index and post-operative cold sensitivity using modified USPHS Criteria. The data were evaluated with McNemar's test (p=0.05). Results: Of all placed restorations evaluated at 24-month recall, nine restorations failed. Retention rates for Single Bond Plus, Scotch Bond SE and Easy Bond were 97%, 90%, and 95% after 24 months, respectively. 

 

Materials/3M ESPE	Retention rate	Baseline/n=42	12 Months/n=42	24 month/
SBP	A*	100	98%	97%
	C**	0	2%	3%
SE	A	100	93%	90%
	C	0	7%	10%
EB	A	100%	98%	95%
	C	0 (0.00)	2%	5%

Conclusions: Within the limits of this short term evaluation, there is no significant clinical difference between adhesives (p<.05). Funded in part by 3M ESPE.