Clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions. Three-year clinical evaluation of One-Step in non-carious cervical lesions. A 36-month clinical evaluation of ethanol/water and acetone-based etch-and-rinse adhesives in non-carious cervical lesions. A three-year clinical evaluation of two-bottle versus one-bottle dentin adhesives. Clinical evaluation of resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions. Determination of changes on tooth-colored cervical restorations in vivo using a three-dimensional laser scanning device. Clinical evaluation of tooth-colored materials in cervical lesions. Three-year randomized clinical evaluation of a low-shrinkage silorane-based resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions Class V lesions restored with four different tooth-colored materials – 3-year results Noncarious cervical lesions restored with three different tooth-colored materials: two-year results. Three-year clinical evaluation of the Clearfil Liner Bond system. 5-year clinical performance of resin composite versus resin modified glass ionomer restorative system in non-carious cervical lesions. Restoring cervical lesions with flexible composites. Two-year clinical performance of Class V resin-modified glass-lonomer and resin composite restorations. Clinical evaluation of a nanohybrid and a flowable resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions: 24-month results. An 18-months' evaluation of self-etch and etch & rinse adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions Five-year clinical evaluation of two adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions. One-year clinical performance of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite restorative material in unprepared Class V restorations. Two-year clinical evaluation of resinous restorative systems in non-carious cervical lesions. Retention of a resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions. A 6-year follow-up. A clinical evaluation of a resin composite and a compomer in non-carious Class V lesions. A 3-year follow-up. A 24-month randomized clinical trial of a two- and three-step etch-and-rinse technique. Long-term dentin retention of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions.
The use of adhesive material s to restore non-carious cervical lesions ( NCCL ) has become the st and ard practice . Until recently , the most reliable material for restoring NCCL is glass ionomer cement , but the esthetics can be problematic . This study compared the retention of a self-etching adhesive , Clearfil SE Bond , with Clearfil ST resin composite ( SE ) , with the phosphoric acid-etch single bottle adhesive Single Bond with A110 resin composite ( SB ) and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement , Fuji II LC , ( FJ ) .  Ninety-two restorations in 20 patients ( mean age 61 years ) were placed . The teeth were restored r and omly and manufacturers ' instructions were followed . Patients were recalled at 6 months , 1 , 2 and 3 years and the restorations were evaluated for marginal staining . The restorations were photographed at baseline and at recall periods . At one year , 80 restorations were available for evaluation ; at 2 years , 65 restorations were evaluated and at 3 years , 55 restorations were evaluated . The cumulative retention rates at 1 year , 2 years and 3 years , respectively , were SE : 97 % , 93 % , 90 % ; SB : 86 % , 77 % , 77 % ; FJ : 100 % , 100 % , 97 % . At 3 years , RM-GIC performed the best , followed by Clearfil SE Bond/Clearfil ST . Single Bond/A110 's performance was significantly less than the other 2 material s ( p = 0.012 ) PURPOSE To clinical ly evaluate the 3-year performance of a one-bottle dentin adhesive in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions ( NCCLs ) with resin composite . MATERIAL S AND METHODS 105 NCCLs were restored with either AElite Flow , Bisco Glaze ( both flowable resin-based composites ) or Silux ( a microfilled resin-based composite ) , using One-Step dentin adhesive . The cavities were cleaned with pumice and water slurry , the dentin lightly roughened with a fine diamond bur , and the restorations placed according to the manufacturer 's instructions . Patients were recalled at 6 months , 1 year , 2 years and 3 years , and restoration integrity and marginal discoloration assessed . RESULTS The overall retention rates were : 6 months , 100 % ; 1 year , 95 % ; 2 years , 87 % ; 3 years , 75 % . Marginal discoloration was negligible , and there was no significant difference among the material s , although there was a trend for it to be greater around the Bisco Glaze restorations UNLABELLED This double-blind r and omized clinical trial compared different ethanol/water and acetone-based systems in non-carious cervical lesions over 36 months . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Eighty-four patients having at least one non-carious cervical lesion [ NCCL ] under occlusion were enrolled in this study . A total of 84 restorations were placed , half for each group ( Adper Single Bond [ SB ] + FiltekA110 or One Step [ OS ] + MicroNew ) . All the material s were placed by two calibrated operators . Two other independent examiners evaluated the restorations at baseline , 6 , 12 , 18 and 36 months , according to slightly modified USPHS criteria . Statistical analysis between material s in each period was conducted using the Fisher 's exact test ( alpha=0.05 ) , and performance of the material s in the baseline in comparison to each period was evaluated by McNemar 's test ( alpha=0.05 ) . RESULTS The 12- , 18- and 36-month retention rates for SB were 95.2 % ( 12 and 18 months ) and 92.3 % ( 36 months ) . For OS , the retention rates were 83.3 % , 73.8 % and 56.4 % , respectively , for each recall period . After 36 months , 10 OS restorations ( 25.7 % ) and seven SB restorations ( 17.9 % ) were rated as Bravo in the marginal discoloration item . CONCLUSIONS The ethanol/water-based adhesive ( Single Bond ) that was evaluated showed a higher retention rate than the acetone-based system ( One Step ) after 36 months of clinical service BACKGROUND The authors conducted an in vivo investigation to compare the clinical performance of two commercial one-bottle adhesives and a two-bottle adhesive for restoration of noncarious cervical lesions ( NCCLs ) . METHOD The patient pool consisted of 57 patients and 171 teeth ( three teeth per patient ) , with one NCCL per tooth . Each patient received three resin-based composite restorations , each with a different adhesive : one tooth with a two-bottle , water-based adhesive as the control ; another tooth with a one-bottle , ethanol-based adhesive ; and a third tooth with a one-bottle , solvent-free adhesive . The authors assessed restorations in terms of retention , marginal integrity , margin discoloration and air sensitivity at baseline , six months , one year , two years and three years after initial placement . RESULTS The retention rates at 36 months were 88 percent for the first adhesive , 81 percent for the second adhesive and 90 percent for the third adhesive . No statistically significant differences in retention rates could be shown , with 86 percent of restorations retained overall . Measures of marginal integrity , marginal discoloration and sensitivity also had no statistically significant differences between the three adhesives ( P > .05 ) . CONCLUSIONS All three adhesives performed with acceptable outcomes after a 36-month period , with small differences between the one- and two-bottle systems and between the various solvents . Retention rate was moderately high and air sensitivity was markedly reduced ; however , superficial marginal discoloration and marginal degradation was notable . Certain lesion , tooth and patient characteristics may predispose restorations to retention failure . CLINICAL IMPLICATION S The type of solvent may not be a major factor in retention of Class V restorations in NCCLs . Both single-bottle adhesives and conventional two-bottle adhesives performed acceptably BACKGROUND The clinical performance of various tooth-coloured material s used to restore Non-Carious Cervical Lesions ( NCCLs ) has been evaluated . However , most of these evaluations were in western societies where soft diets requiring little mastication were common . The present study sets out to evaluate resin composite and RMGIC in the restoration of NCCLs among a Nigerian sub population group with fibrous diet requiring more rigorous mastication . PATIENTS & METHODS The study included all adult patients that presented at the Dental Hospital , Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals Complex , Ile-Ife , Nigeria with non-carious cervical lesions over a period of six months . The teeth with non-carious cervical lesions in each patient were allocated into treatment with either resin composite or resin-modified glass ionomer cement by simple r and om sampling using ballots . The depth of the NCCLs was measured using a graduated flat ash periodontal probe . All the treatment was done by the first author according to the manufacturer 's instructions . Patients were recalled and evaluated at 48- hours , 3- months , 6- months and 12- months using the USPHS criteria . Data analysis was done using SPSS version 15 . The level of significance was put at 0.05 . RESULTS At the end of 12 months , 143 resin composite and 144 RMGIC restorations were evaluated , out of which 37 resin composite and 13 RMGIC restorations were dislodged , giving a retention rate of 74.1 % and 91.0 % respectively . The difference was statistically significant ( p<0.05 ) . For marginal discolouration , marginal adaptation , abrasion wear resistance , post operative sensitivity , and secondary caries , there were no statistically significant differences in the performance of resin composite and RMGIC . There was more retention failure of both resin composite and RMGIC restorations in NCCLs in m and ibular teeth than in maxillary teeth . The differences were statistically significant ( p<0.05 ) . CONCLUSION RMGIC demonstrated a higher retention rate in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions than resin composite over a period of 12 month The present study aim ed at the determination of changes of tooth-colored cervical restorations  in vivo using an optical 3-dimensional laser scanning device . The study was performed on 197 cervical restorations placed on incisors , canines , and premolars . Four different tooth-colored restoration material s , a composite , a polyacid-modified resin composite , and two resin-modified glass ionomer cements , were used for the restoration of the lesions . For the determination of changes , images were taken at baseline and 15 , 24 and 36 months after the placement of the fillings using a 3D-laser scanning device . The images were superimposed automatically , and digital subtraction was made by a specially developed image analysis software . The total substance loss on the entire filling surface at 36 months for the resin-modified glass ionomer Photac-Fil was 44 ( + /-23 ) microm , for Fuji II LC 45 ( + /-26 ) microm , for Dyract 71 ( + /-47 ) microm and for Tetric 18 ( + /-12 ) microm . Differentiating between the class of lesion , a higher wear rate was observed at 36 months on restorations which had been placed in erosion/non-carious cervical cavities ( 66 ( + /-33 ) microm ) . In conclusion , the composite material demonstrated a distinctly lower surface wear rate over time in comparison to the resin-modified glass ionomer cements and the polyacid-modified resin composite PURPOSE To determine the 18-month clinical performance of four tooth-colored restoratives in non-carious cervical lesions . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Buccal abrasion lesions in 83 teeth were restored with each of the following material s : Fuji Cap II , Fuji II LC , APH/Universal Bond 3 , Lite Fil II A/Imperva Bond . Baseline and an 18-month recall was carried out using the Ryge ( USPHS ) method for retention , color match , marginal adaptation , cavosurface marginal discoloration , anatomic form and secondary caries . RESULTS The USPHS results ( % alfa ) for the four products were , respectively : color match ( 9 % , 48 % , 57 % , 55 % ) , marginal discoloration ( 71 % , 76 % , 52 % , 50 % ) , marginal adaptation ( 24 % , 24 % , 33 % , 15 % ) , anatomic form ( 67 % , 86 % , 95 % , 45 % ) and retention ( 100 % , 95 % , 100 % , 65 % ) . Results indicated that ( 1 ) Fuji Cap II exhibited a poor color match at baseline ( 2 ) Color matching of Fuji II LC was comparable to the resin composites and ( 3 ) seven Lite Fil II/Imperva Bond restorations ( 35 % ) were dislodged after 1 1/2 years Objective The clinical suitability of low-shrinkage resin composites for class V cavities has not been investigated in vivo . The purpose of this double-blind r and omized clinical trial was to compare the clinical performances of low-shrinkage resin composite Filtek silorane and nanoceramic resin composite Ceram X mono in non-carious cervical lesions ( NCCLs ) over 36 months . Material s and methods Two calibrated operators restored 144 NCCLs in 24 patients by using Filtek silorane with silorane system adhesive ( FS/SSA ) and Ceram X mono with Clearfil SE ( CXM/CSE ) or XP bond ( CXM/XPB ) . Then , two blinded , calibrated evaluators assessed the restorations at the baseline and 6 , 12 , 24 , and 36 months thereafter by using the modified US Public Health Service criteria . Data were analyzed with the Freidman and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests at a significance level of 5 % ( P < 0.05 ) . Results No restoration was associated with postoperative sensitivity or secondary caries . Further , no group showed significant changes until 12 months . The retention rates of the FS/SSA ( 97.5 % ) , CXM/CSE ( 97.5 % ) , and CXM/XPB ( 92.31 % ) restorations did not differ significantly ( P > 0.05 ) . Six ( 4 CXM/XPB , 1 FS/SSA , and 1 CXM/CSE ) of the 121 restorations evaluated at 36 months were completely lost . However , no significant intergroup differences were observed in the other evaluation criteria . Conclusion The 3-year clinical performances of the restorative material s in NCCLs were not significantly different . Clinical relevance Filtek silorane is suitable for restoring NCCLs Abstract The aim of this study was to compare the treatment results using four different types of tooth colored material s for restoring class V lesions . A total of 197 class V restorations ( n=197 ) were placed by one dentist in 37 patients on incisors , canines and premolars . The fillings were placed due to different indications : erosion/non-carious cervical defects ( n=69 ) , primary carious lesions ( n=57 ) , and for replacing defective existing fillings ( n=71 ) . The teeth were assigned on a r and om basis to four groups for restoration with either a composite ( group 1 : n=36 ; Tetric , Vivadent ) , or a polyacid-modified resin composite ( group 2 : n=79 ; Dyract , Dentsply ) , or one of two different resin-modified glass ionomer cements ( group 3 : n=51 , Fuji II LC , GC ; group 4 : n=31 , Photac-Fil , Espe ) . The restorations were evaluated by a single-blind design , according to a modified USPHS system 36 months following placement . Statistical analysis was completed with the Pearson Chi-square test for comparing the results of the four groups ( P<0.05 ) . Additionally , the survival rates were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the Log-rank test ( P<0.05 ) . The Alpha ratings were as follows ( Tetric/Dyract/Fuji II LC/Photac Fil ) : shade match ( 86%/77%/58%/40 % ) , surface texture ( 81%/83%/16%/9 % ) , marginal integrity ( enamel ) ( 73%/67%/61%/61 % ) , marginal integrity ( dentin ) ( 86%/70%/55%/61 % ) , marginal discoloration ( enamel ) ( 59%/44%/58%/52 % ) , marginal discoloration ( dentin ) ( 82%/84%/71%/48 % ) , anatomic contours ( 91%/83%/39%/ 35 % ) . One Tetric restoration , five Dyract restorations , two Fuji II LC restorations and three Photac restorations were dislodged within the study period . The retention of the restorations showed no significant difference among the four material s. However , the clinical performance of the restorations retained over the 3-year period showed distinct differences for the four material s. The best clinical performance was observed for the resin composite , whereas the quality of the Dyract restorations without enamel etching was worse . The poorest results were obtained for the restorations with the resin-modified glass ionomers INTRODUCTION The aim of this two-year prospect i ve clinical study was to evaluate and compare the clinical performance of three different adhesive esthetic material s in noncarious cervical lesions . MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 90 restorations ( 30 per material ) were placed in 30 patients who ranged in age between 18 and 50 years and of both genders , by a single operator with no previous preparation . The restoration of noncarious cervical lesions was done with either a microfilled composite ( Esthet . X/Dentsply/De Trey , Konstanz , Germany , and Prime&Bond NT/Dentsply/De Trey ) , a nanohybrid composite ( TetricEvoCeram/Vivadent , Schaan , Liechtenstein , and AdheSE/Vivadent ) , or a compomer ( Dyract eXtra/Dentsply/De Trey and Xeno III Dentsply/De Trey ) . All restorations were evaluated by independent examiners using a modified US Public Health Service criteria at baseline and after 12 and 24 months for six clinical categories . Data were analyzed statistically by Pearson 's chi-square or the Fisher 's exact test at 5 % significance level ( p<0.05 ) . RESULTS Results showed that most of the restorations were clinical ly satisfactory after 12 and 24 months , with no statistically significant differences among the three groups for all evaluated criteria . CONCLUSION Treatment of noncarious cervical lesions using composite and compomer material s , combined with the appropriate adhesive systems and properly implemented restorative procedures , gives satisfactory results after a two-year evaluation period Modern dental adhesive systems have improved the bond of restorative material s to mineralized tooth structures . The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of composite restorations placed in abrasion and erosion lesions using the Clearfil Liner Bond dental adhesive system . Following ADA clinical guidelines for dentin and enamel adhesive material s , 62 facial class 5 smooth surface erosion or abrasion lesions with no undercuts and involving primarily root surfaces were restored in 25 adult male and female patients . The teeth were restored without preparations using Clearfil Liner Bond and Clearfil Photo Anterior composite resin . The clinical performance of the restorations was assessed by two examiners at baseline , 6 months , 1 , 2 , and 3 years using the following evaluative parameters : color match , marginal discoloration , and marginal integrity according to modified Ryge criteria ; the presence or absence of recurrent decay ; pre- and postoperative sensitivity ; and restoration failure due to loss of retention or other causes . At the end of 3 years , four of the 55 restorations remaining in the study failed due to lack of retention ( 92.7 % retention rate ) . The evaluations of the other clinical parameters demonstrated excellent performance by this system AIM To comparatively assess the 5-year clinical performance of a 1-bottle adhesive and resin composite system with a resin-modified glass ionomer restorative in non-carious cervical lesions . METHOD AND MATERIAL S One operator placed 70 restorations ( 35 resin modified glass ionomer restorations and 35 resin composite restorations ) in 30 patients under rubber dam isolation without mechanical preparation .  The restorations were directly assessed by 2 independent examiners , using modified USPHS criteria at baseline and 6 , 12 , 24 and 60 months . RESULTS Twenty-two patients were available for recall after 5 years ( 73.3 % recall rate ) and 55 out of 70 restorations were evaluated . Excellent agreement was registered for all criteria between examiners ( kappa > or = 0.85 ) . Sixteen composite restorations were dislodged ( 51.5 % retention ) and 1 ionomer restoration was lost ( 96.4 % retention ) . The McNemar test detected significant differences in resin composite restorations between baseline and 5-year recall for marginal integrity ( p<0.001 ) and retention ( p=0.004 ) . For resin modified glass ionomer restorations , no significant differences were identified for all criteria ( p>0.05 ) . When comparing both material s , the Fisher exact test pointed out significant differences in retention ( p=0.002 ) after 5 years of clinical service . CONCLUSIONS After 5 years of evaluation , the clinical performance of resin modified glass ionomer restorations was superior to resin composite restorations OBJECTIVES Flexure at the tooth cervix has been suggested to dislodge cervical restorations more rapidly . The objective of this r and omized controlled clinical trial was to test the hypothesis that a higher composite flexibility better withst and s tooth flexure stress . METHODS 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 the three experimental groups : ( 1 ) the three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive Permaquick applied with the stiff micro-hybrid composite Amelogen Hybrid ( PMQ/A-Hy , Ultradent ) , ( 2 ) Permaquick applied with the more flexible micro-filled composite Amelogen Microfill ( PMQ/A-Mi , Ultradent ) , or ( 3 ) the ' golden st and ard ' three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive Optibond FL applied with the micro-hybrid composite Prodigy ( O-FL/Pro , Kerr ) . RESULTS The recall rate at 7 years was 80 % . No statistically significant difference was found for any of the parameters evaluated neither between both adhesives , nor between both composites ( McNemar , p>0.05 ) . Eleven percent of the O-FL/Pro restorations were clinical ly unacceptable due to loss of retention ( 5.5 % ) and severe marginal discoloration ( 5.5 % ) . In the PMQ-group , 22 % of the PMQ/A-Mi restorations ( 8 % loss of retention , 5 % severe enamel margin defects , 3 % severe dentin margin defects , 6 % severe marginal discoloration , 3 % extreme sensitivity ) and 19 % of the PMQ/A-Hy restorations ( 13 % loss of retention , 3 % severe enamel margin defects , 3 % severe marginal discoloration ) needed repair or replacement . SIGNIFICANCE The clinical performance of the three adhesive/composite combinations was good and reliable during the 7-year clinical trial . It was concluded that the composite stiffness does not affect the clinical longevity of cervical composite restorations While a one-year report had been previously published , this study was undertaken to evaluate the clinical performance and appearance of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite over two years . Thirty-seven pairs of restorations of FujI II LC and Z 250/Single Bond were placed in caries-free cervical erosion/abfraction lesions without tooth preparation . Restorations were clinical ly evaluated at baseline , 6 , 12 , 18 and 24 months using modified Ryge/USPHS criteria . No statistically significant difference ( p = 0.13 ) was observed in the overall performance of the material s. Retention was 96 % for the resin-modified glass ionomer and 81 % for the resin composite , with no additional restorations of either material lost after one year . As previously reported , retention of the Z 250 restorations at six months was below the minimum specified in the ADA Acceptance Program for Dentin and Enamel Adhesives . The resin composite restorations generally had a better appearance , with a 100 % alpha rating in color match , versus 85 % for the resin-modified glass ionomer PURPOSE To evaluate the 24-month clinical performance of  cervical restorations  using a nanohybrid and a flowable resin composite with a one-step self-etching adhesive . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Twenty-one patients with at least one pair of non-carious cervical lesions participated in this study . A total of 134 non-carious cervical lesions were restored ( 67 with a nanohybrid resin composite , Gr and io ; 67 with a flowable resin composite , Gr and io Flow ) using a one-step self-etching adhesive system , Futura Bond NR , by one dentist . The restorations were evaluated for retention , color match , marginal discoloration , marginal adaptation , surface texture , anatomic form , and secondary caries by two calibrated examiners at baseline and after 6 , 12 , and 24 months using modified USPHS criteria . The survival rates of the restorations were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier estimator . The comparison of resin composites for each category was performed with the Pearson chi-square test , and the performance of restorations at baseline and after each recall time was evaluated using McNemar 's test ( p < 0.05 ) . RESULTS All patients attended the 24-month recall . The retention rates at 6 months were 66 % and 58 % , and 61 % and 57 % at 12 months for Gr and io and Gr and io Flow , respectively . At the 24-month recall , the retention rate was 60 % for Gr and io and 54 % for Gr and io Flow . No statistically significant differences were found in retention rates among the restorative material s in any evaluation period ( p > 0.05 ) . For marginal discoloration and anatomical form , three Gr and io and three Gr and io Flow restorations showed Bravo scores at the end of 24 months . The restorations in both groups had Alfa ratings of 100 % for the rest of the criteria evaluated . CONCLUSION The nanohybrid and flowable resin composites showed similar clinical performances in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions over 24 months 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 OBJECTIVE This controlled clinical trial evaluated the 5-year clinical performance of a self-etching primer system including selective enamel-etching with phosphoric acid and a one-bottle adhesive system . METHODS Seventy-two non-carious cervical lesions in 8 patients ( 4 male and 4 female ) with a mean age of 61.3 years ( range 45 - 78 ) participated in the study . An enamel bevel was placed and dentin lightly ground , and cavities restored with clearfil liner bond II ( LB ) or single bond ( SB ) in conjunction with a hybrid resin composite ( Clearfil AP-X ) . In the case of 27 cavities for LB , the enamel was pretreated with 37 % phosphoric acid for 10 s. Each patient received both types of restoration , which were distributed on a r and om basis . All restorations ( 37 restorations for LB and 35 restorations for SB ) were placed by one dentist . The restorations were evaluated blind after 5 years using modified USPHS criteria . The data were statistically analyzed using the Fisher 's exact test . RESULTS All but one restoration ( which was replaced by a crown after the 2-year recall ) were evaluated after 5 years . 100 % retention rates were recorded for both restorative groups . No caries was detected in association with any restorations . The only minor problem was marginal discoloration ; superficial and localized marginal discoloration occurred around 18 % of the restorations , and mainly at the dentin margin . There were no significant differences in the marginal integrity between the LB and SB groups . CONCLUSIONS Restorative material s used in this study demonstrated a good clinical effectiveness in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions for 5 years This study evaluated the clinical performance and appearance of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite over one year . Thirty-seven pairs of restorations of Fuji II LC and Z250/Single Bond were placed in caries-free cervical erosion/abfraction lesions without tooth preparation . Restorations were clinical ly evaluated at baseline and 6 and 12 months , using modified Ryge/USPHS criteria . No significant difference ( p>0.05 ) was observed in performance of both material s , although retention of the Z250 restorations was below the minimum specified in the ADA Acceptance Program for Dentin and Enamel Adhesives . Little difference in the restorations ' appearance was observed This controlled clinical trial evaluated the 2-year clinical performance of a one-bottle etch- and -rinse adhesive and resin composite system ( Excite/Tetric Ceram ) compared to a resin-modified glass ionomer cement ( RMGIC ) ( Vitremer/3 M ) in non-carious cervical lesions . Seventy cervical restorations ( 35 resin composite - RC- restorations and 35 RMGIC restorations ) were placed by a single operator in 30 patients under rubber dam isolation without mechanical preparation . All restorations were evaluated blindly by 2 independent examiners using the modified USPHS criteria at baseline , and after 6 , 12 and 24 months . Data were analyzed statistically by Fisher 's exact and McNemar tests . After 2 years , 59 out of 70 restorations were evaluated . As much as 78.8 % retention rate was recorded for RC restorations , while 100 % retention was obtained for RMGIC restorations . Fisher 's exact test showed significant differences ( p=0.011 ) for retention . However , there were no significant differences for marginal integrity , marginal discoloration , anatomic form and secondary caries between the RC and RMGIC restorations . The McNemar test detected significant differences for Excite/TC between baseline and the 2-year recall for retention ( p=0.02 ) , marginal integrity ( p=0.002 ) and anatomic form ( p=0.04 ) . Therefore , the one-bottle etch- and -rinse bonding system/resin composite showed an inferior clinical performance compared to the RMGIC OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical retention of a new resin-modified glass ionomer cement based adhesive combined with a hybrid resin composite or a poly-acid modified resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions during a 6-year period . METHODS The resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive ( Fuji Bond LC ) , was placed in 73 cervical lesions , 36 with a universal hybrid resin composite ( Tetric Ceram ) and 37 with a poly-acid modified resin composite ( Hytac ) . Fifty-one in lesions with sclerotic dentin and 22 in non-sclerotic ones . Of the sclerotic lesions 38 were slightly roughened with a diamond bur before conditioning . The restorations were evaluated with slightly modified USPHS criteria every six months during a 6-year period . RESULTS All except six restorations were evaluated during the 6 years . Twelve ( 17.9 % ) were lost , four Tetric Ceram ( 11.8 % ) and eight Hytac ( 24.2 % ) ( p<0.05 ) . Four were found in non-sclerotic lesions ( 20.0 % ) and eight in sclerotic lesions ( 17.0 % ) . The differences between the sclerotic and non-sclerotic and the roughened and non-roughened lesions were not significant . CONCLUSIONS The resin-modified glass adhesive showed a superior clinical retention combined with the resin composite material , with an annual failure rate of 2 % PURPOSE To compare the clinical performance of a resin composite and a polyacid-modified resin composite ( compomer ) in non-carious cervical lesions using a one-step self-etch adhesive . METHODS Thirty patients , each with two non-carious cervical lesions ( 60 restorations ) , received one composite ( Pertac-II ) restoration and one compomer ( Hytac ) restoration , both used in conjunction with a self-etch adhesive ( Prompt L-Pop ) and placed following the manufacturer 's instructions . Evaluations were at baseline , 6 , 12 and 36 months after placement for retention , margin adaptation , marginal discoloration , anatomic form , secondary caries and postoperative sensitivity . Statistical analysis with the Pearson Chi-square test was undertaken . RESULTS Retention rates were 86.6 % for composite and 86.7 % for compomer at 36 months . 3.3 % of composite and 6.7 % of compomer restorations showed a deficiency in marginal adaptation . Both material s showed a slight marginal discoloration of 7.7 % . More deterioration in anatomic form occurred with the compomer ( 11.5 % ) than the composite ( 3.8 % ) . None of the restorations exhibited secondary caries or postoperative sensitivity problems . There was no significant difference in performance between the material s in any of the categories evaluated PURPOSE This 24-month r and omized paired tooth clinical study evaluated the performance of All Bond 3 used in the simplified ( 2-step ) and full ( 3-step ) versions . METHODS 33 patients , with at least two similar sized non-carious cervical lesions participated in this study . A total of 66 restorations  were placed , half using the 2-step All Bond 3 ( AB3 - 2 ) and the other half using 3-step All Bond 3 ( AB3 - 3 ) . The restorations were placed incrementally using the composite resin Aelite . The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 6 , 12 and 24 months following the modified USPHS criteria . Statistical differences between the adhesive were tested using with McNemar 's test and clinical performance over time for each material with the Fisher 's exact test ( alpha = 0.05 ) . RESULTS After 24 months , six AB3 - 2 and four AB3 - 3 were rated as bravo for marginal discoloration but did not differ from each other significantly ( P > 0.05 ) . The retention rates at 24 months of AB3 - 2 and AB3 - 3 were 90.9 % and 97.0 % , respectively ( P > 0.05 ) 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
Conclusion The current best evidence indicates that a glass ionomer cement has a significantly lower risk of loss of a NCCL restoration compared to either a three-step etch- and -rinse or a two-step etch- and -rinse adhesive system ; a three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive system has a significantly lower risk of loss of a NCCL restoration compared to a two-step etch- and -rinse adhesive system .
No significant difference could be observed in the risk of loss of a tooth-colored NCCL restoration between a three-step etch- and -rinse adhesive system and either a two-step self-etch or a one-step self-etch adhesive system
Objectives The aim of this review was to assess the effect of different adhesive systems and tooth preparation on the retention of tooth-colored restorative material s  placed in non-carious cervical lesions ( NCCLs ) .