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 .
Two-year clinical performance of two primer adhesives on class V restorations.
The prime purpose of this clinical trial was to examine the clinical quality and retention rate of resin composite in connection with two recently developed acetone-based primer adhesives in Class V lesions according to ADA Clinical Protocol Guidelines for Dentin and Enamel Adhesive Material s. All cavities were nonretentive and predominantly in dentin ( mixed Class V lesions ) . Total bonding was not limited either by sub-base or by base material s. All the trial restorations were placed under rubber dam .  Group 1 ( Version 16 - 135 - 1 ) and group 2 ( Version 17 - 17 - 1 )  consisted of 42 patients with 46 trials and 38 patients with 43 fillings , respectively . The mean follow-up period and the recall response at the end of the study of group 1 were 22.8 months and 92.9 % and of group 2 were 22.4 months and 94.7 % . The trial restorations of both groups maintained their predominantly rated USPHS-Code Alpha level within the follow-up period . The cumulative failure rate of two trials in group 1 and four in group 2 determined a failure percentage of 4.4 % and 9.3 % , respectively , which is within the ADA-18 month limit of < 10 % Charlie . The Version KL 16 - 135 - 1 came into the market as Prime & Bond(R ) 2.1 , and the other one turned out to be Dyract Adhesive(R ) PSA , which was primarily introduced as a single-component adhesive for compomer restorative Dyract(R ) ( Dentsply DeTrey , Germany )
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 .