Five-year clinical evaluation of a universal adhesive: A randomized double-blind trial.
Five-year clinical evaluation of a universal adhesive: A randomized double-blind trial.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.dental.2020.08.007
复制
发表时间：
2020-11-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Loguercio, Alessandro D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
de Paris Matos, Thalita;Perdigao, Jorge;Loguercio, Alessandro D
目的：用两种评价标准评价美国明尼苏达州圣保罗市3M口腔护理公司的Scotchond Universal粘合剂(SU；3M Oral Care)在非龋性宫颈病变(NCCLS)中的临床应用效果。200个修复体分为四组：SU-ERM：酸洗+湿性牙本质；SU-ERD：酸洗+干牙本质；SU-SET：选择性釉质酸蚀；SU-SE：自酸蚀。纳米填充的复合树脂被逐渐放置。使用世界牙科联合会(FDI)和美国公共卫生服务(USPHS)的标准在基线和5年后对修复进行评估。存活率(保留/骨折)用Kaplan-Meier和LOG-RANK检验计算。二次结果采用Friedman重复测量秩方差分析(α=0.05)。结果：5年后的召回率为86%。ERM和ERD的固位率为93%，SEET为88.4%，SE为81.4%。SE与ERD、SE与ERM有显著差异(P=0.01)。此外，边缘变色和适应性与ERM和ERD有显著差异，导致边缘差异小于SE(p<；0.05)。迹象：5年后，与自酸蚀策略相比，通用粘接剂在酸蚀和冲洗策略中的临床行为更好。对于自酸蚀策略，强烈推荐使用选择性釉质酸蚀。5年后，FDI和USPHS的评估标准显示出类似的结果。
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the five-year clinical performance of Scotchbond Universal Adhesive (SU; 3M Oral Care, St. Paul, MN, USA) in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) using two evaluation criteria.METHODS: Thirty-nine patients participated in this study. Two hundred restorations were assigned to four groups: SU-ERm: etch-and-rinse + moist dentin; SU-ERd: etch-and-rinse + dry dentin; SU-Set: selective enamel etching; and SU-SE: self-etch. A nanofilled composite resin was placed incrementally. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 5 years using both the World Dental Federation (FDI) and the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. The survival rates (retention/fractures) were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier and the log-rank test. For the secondary outcomes, Friedman repeated measures analysis of variance by rank was applied (alpha = 0.05).RESULTS: After 5 years the recall rate was 86%. The retention/fracture rates were 93% for Erm and ERd, 88.4% for SEet and 81.4% for SE. A significant difference was observed for SE vs. ERd and SE vs. ERm (p = 0.01). Also, marginal discoloration and adaptation showed significant differences with ERm and ERd resulting in fewer marginal discrepancies than SE (p < 0.05).SIGNIFICANCE: After 5 years, the clinical behavior of the universal adhesive in the etch-and-rinse strategy was better when compared to the self-etch strategy. The use of selective enamel etching is highly recommended for the self-etch strategy. The FDI and USPHS evaluation criteria showed similar results after 5 years.