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 ) .
Evaluation of esthetic parameters of resin-modified glass-ionomer materials and a polyacid-modified resin composite in Class V cervical lesions.
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to compare the esthetics of 3 resin-modified glass-ionomer material s and 1 polyacid-modified resin composite to the esthetics of a conventional glass-ionomer control material . METHOD AND MATERIAL S One hundred eighty-seven Class V cervical restorations were observed clinical ly over 18 months . The esthetic index system that was used evaluated color match , translucency or opacity , and surface roughness . RESULTS The tested material s behaved very dissimilarly and inconsistently . In general , the esthetic results of the resin-modified glass-ionomer material s and the polyacid-modified resin composite were far from optimal . The esthetic appearance of restorations seriously deteriorated during clinical service , mainly because of discoloration of margins , changes in translucency and opacity , and rapidly appearing roughness or dullness on the surface . Both the resin-modified glass-ionomer material s and the polyacid-modified resin composite evaluated in this study performed better esthetically than did the conventional glass-ionomer material . CONCLUSION Indications for these combination material s are limited to areas where esthetics is not a primary concern but where their ease of application may guarantee a more durable functional result
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 ) .