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 ) .
Eight-year clinical evaluation of a 2-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective enamel etching.
OBJECTIVES The objective of this r and omized controlled clinical trial was to evaluate the 8-year clinical performance of a mild 2-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious Class-V lesions with and without prior selective phosphoric acid-etching of the enamel cavity margins . METHODS A total of 100 non-carious Class-V lesions in 29 patients were restored with Clearfil AP-X ( Kuraray ) .  The composite restorations were bonded following two different approaches : ( 1 ) application of Clearfil SE ( Kuraray ) following a self-etch approach ( control group ; C-SE non-etch ) , ( 2 ) selective phosphoric acid-etching of the enamel cavity margins before application of Clearfil SE ( experimental group ; C-SE etch ) . The restorations were evaluated after 6 months , 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 and 8 years of clinical service regarding their retention , marginal integrity and discoloration , caries occurrence , preservation of tooth vitality and post-operative sensitivity . RESULTS The recall rate at 8 years was 76 % . Only two restorations , one of the C-SE non-etch group and one of the C-SE etch group , were clinical ly unacceptable due to loss of retention leading to a retention rate and a clinical success rate of 97 % in both groups . Aging of the restorations was characterized by an increase in the percentage of restorations with a small but clinical ly acceptable marginal defect ( C-SE non-etch : 92 % ; C-SE etch : 84 % ) and /or a superficial marginal discoloration ( C-SE non-etch : 44 % ; C-SE etch : 28 % ) . At the enamel side , the presence of small marginal defects ( C-SE non-etch : 86 % ; C-SE etch : 65 % ) and superficial marginal discoloration ( C-SE non-etch : 11 % ; C-SE etch% ) was more frequently noticed in the control group than in the experimental group . The difference , however , was only statistically significant for the presence of superficial marginal discoloration ( McNemar , p=0.01 ) . SIGNIFICANCE After 8 years of clinical functioning , the clinical effectiveness of Clearfil SE remained excellent , with selective acid-etching of the enamel cavity margins only having some minor positive effect on marginal integrity and absence of marginal discoloration at enamel
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 ) .