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 ) .
Clinical evaluation of an all-in-one adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions with different degrees of dentin sclerosis.
This r and omized clinical trial compared the performance of an all-in-one adhesive ( iBond ) applied in sclerotic and non-sclerotic non-carious cervical lesions with that of a three-step etch-prime-bond adhesive ( Gluma Solid Bond , SB ) .  One-hundred and five lesions were r and omly assigned to four groups according to adhesive , sclerosis scale and technique : 1 ) SB applied to lesions with sclerosis scale 1 and 2 ( n=26 ) ; 2 ) iBond applied to lesions with sclerosis scale 1 and 2 ( n=28 ) ; 3 ) iBond applied to lesions with sclerosis scale 3 and 4 ( n=25 ) and 4 ) iBond applied with prior acid-etching to lesions with sclerosis scale 3 and 4 ( n=26 ) . A microfilled composite ( Durafill VS ) was used as the restorative material . The restorations were evaluated for retention , color match , marginal adaptation , anatomic form , cavosurface margin discoloration , secondary caries , pre- and post-operative sensitivity , surface texture and fracture at insertion ( baseline ) , 6 , 18 months and at 3 years using modified USPHS evaluation criteria ( Alfa = excellent ; Bravo= clinical ly acceptable ; Charlie= clinical ly unacceptable ) . There was a high percentage of Bravo scores for marginal adaptation ( 4%-32 % ) and marginal discoloration ( 18%-60 % ) in Groups 2 , 3 and 4 , but all groups had < 5 % Charlie scores at 6 months and < 10 % Charlie scores at 18 months for retention and marginal discoloration , respectively . However , it should be noted that 13 % of the restorations in Group 4 were not retained at three years
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 ) .