HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 138, No 4, 507-514. © 2007 American Dental Association

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Loguercio, A. D. Articles by Reis, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Loguercio, A. D. Articles by Reis, A. Related Collections Dental Equipment/Instruments

JADA Continuing Education

Background. There are two bonding strategies for composite restorations: the etch-and-rinse (ER) approach and the self-etch (SE) approach. Few clinical trials have evaluated the SE approach in Class V restorations for a 36-month period. The authors conducted a study to evaluate whether the SE system can provide retention rates and marginal discoloration similar to that of the ER system.

Methods. Twenty-five patients, each having at least two pairs of equivalent noncarious cervical lesions under occlusion, were enrolled in this study. Two calibrated operators placed 78 restorations, one-half for ER and one-half for SE. Two independent examiners evaluated the restorations at baseline and after six-, 12-, 18- and 36-month periods according to the slightly modified U.S. Public Health Service criteria. Statistical analysis between materials in each period was conducted using a Fisher exact test ( = .05), and the performance of the materials at baseline in comparison with each period was evaluated by a McNemar test ( = .05).

Results. Five SE restorations and one ER restoration were lost after 36 months. After 36 months, 10 SE and five ER restorations were rated Bravo in marginal adaptation (P > .05). Fourteen SE and five ER restorations were rated Bravo in marginal discoloration (P < .05).

Conclusions. Although a significantly increased marginal discoloration was observed with SE, both adhesives showed retention rates in noncarious cervical lesions that were not statistically different after 36 months.

Clinical Implications. The ER and SE adhesive systems can be used with confidence; however, SE adhesive showed a faster and more progressive enamel marginal degradation.

Key Words: Cervical lesions; adhesives; composite restorations; dental restoration failure

Abbreviations: Bis-GMA: Bisphenol-A glycidyldimethacrylate • ER: Etch-and-rinse • HEMA: 2-hydroxyethyethyl methacrylate • SE: Self-etch • USPHS: U.S. Public Health Service

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. D. Wilder Jr., E. J. Swift Jr., H. O. Heymann, A. V. Ritter, J. R. Sturdevant, and S. C. Bayne A 12-Year Clinical Evaluation of a Three-Step Dentin Adhesive in Noncarious Cervical Lesions J Am Dent Assoc, May 1, 2009; 140(5): 526 - 535. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. D. Loguercio and A. Reis Application of a Dental Adhesive Using the Self-Etch and Etch-and-Rinse Approaches: An 18-Month Clinical Evaluation J Am Dent Assoc, January 1, 2008; 139(1): 53 - 61. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]