Clinical Evaluation Of A Universal Adhesive In Class V Restorations

Method: 43 adult subjects, 19 years or older, were recruited after obtaining informed consent. To be included each subject had at least 3 1.5mm deep NCCLs. The teeth were restored randomly with Scotchbond Universal total-etch (SBU-TE), Scotchbond Universal SBU-SE or Scotchbond MP- SBMP dental adhesives. All were restored with Filtek Supreme Ultra 3M ESPE composite resin. Teeth were isolated (rubber dam) and cleaned (pumice/water). A short enamel bevel was made with an OS2 bur (Brasseler/GA) on the enamel margin and high speed handpiece (NSK/Japan). All adhesives were applied following manufacturers' directions. Proper composite shade was selected, placed in 2mm increments and light-cured (Elipar S 10 3M ESPE>700mW/cm²). Restorations were finished with burs (7901/OS2/Brasseler) and polished (Sof-Lex/3M ESPE, Enhance/PoGo.Dentsply Caulk). Digital images were made before and after preparation, after finishing and at each recall. Patients were evaluated at baseline (2weeks after restoration), 6 and 12 months. Each evaluation included retention, anatomic form, color match, margin integrity, margin discoloration, surface roughness, secondary caries, staining, gingival index and post-operative cold sensitivity using modified USPHS Criteria. The data were evaluated with McNemar's test (p=0.05). 

Result: 

Of all placed restorations evaluated at 12-month recall, four restorations failed. Marginal discoloration for SBU-TE, SBU-SE and SBMP were 95%, 91%, and 97% after 12 months, respectively. 

Conclusion: Within the limits of this short term evaluation, there was no significant clinical difference between adhesives (p>.05).