IADR Abstract Archives
A New Universal Simplified Adhesive: 18-month Randomized Multi-center Clinical Trial
Objectives: This multi-center double-blind, split-mouth randomized clinical trial evaluate the clinical performance of a new universal adhesive system (Futurabond U, Voco GbmH, Germany) when applied using different application strategies over a period of 18-month.
Methods: Fifty patients participated in this study. Two hundred non-carious cervical lesions were restored using the adhesive Futurabond U according to four adhesive strategies (n = 50 per group): only self-etch (SEE); selective enamel etching + self-etch (SET); etch-and-rinse with dry dentin (ERDry) and; etch-and-rinse with wet dentin (ERWet). After adhesive application, cavities were restored using Admira Fusion composite resin (Voco GmbH). These restorations were evaluated according to FDI criteria in the following items: retention/fracture, marginal adaptation, marginal staining, postoperative sensitivity and caries recurrence.
Results: After 18-month, four patients (12-month; one patient; n=4 restorations and 18-month; 3 patients; n=12 restorations) were not evaluated. Fourteen restorations were lost after 18-month of clinical evaluation (4 for SEE, 3 for SET, 3 for ERDry and 4 for ERWet). The retention rates for 18-month (95% confidence interval) were 92% (81%-97%) for SEE, 94% (83%- 97%) for SET, 94% (83%- 97%) for ERDry, and 92% (81%-97%) for ERWet (p > 0.05). Thirty-eight restorations were considered to have minor discrepancies in marginal adaptation at the 18-month recall (13 for SEE, 13 for SET, 6 for ERDry and 6 for ERWet; p > 0.05). Fourteen restorations were detected as a minor marginal discoloration at the 18-month recall (6 for SEE, 6 for SET, 1 for ERDry and 1 for ERWet; p > 0.05). However, all of them were considered clinically acceptable. No restorations showed postoperative sensitivity and caries recurrence at this time.
Conclusions: The clinical performance of the Futurabond U did not depend on the bonding strategy employed and it was considered reliable when used associated to Admira Fusion unidoses resin composite after 18-month of clinical evaluation.
Methods: Fifty patients participated in this study. Two hundred non-carious cervical lesions were restored using the adhesive Futurabond U according to four adhesive strategies (n = 50 per group): only self-etch (SEE); selective enamel etching + self-etch (SET); etch-and-rinse with dry dentin (ERDry) and; etch-and-rinse with wet dentin (ERWet). After adhesive application, cavities were restored using Admira Fusion composite resin (Voco GmbH). These restorations were evaluated according to FDI criteria in the following items: retention/fracture, marginal adaptation, marginal staining, postoperative sensitivity and caries recurrence.
Results: After 18-month, four patients (12-month; one patient; n=4 restorations and 18-month; 3 patients; n=12 restorations) were not evaluated. Fourteen restorations were lost after 18-month of clinical evaluation (4 for SEE, 3 for SET, 3 for ERDry and 4 for ERWet). The retention rates for 18-month (95% confidence interval) were 92% (81%-97%) for SEE, 94% (83%- 97%) for SET, 94% (83%- 97%) for ERDry, and 92% (81%-97%) for ERWet (p > 0.05). Thirty-eight restorations were considered to have minor discrepancies in marginal adaptation at the 18-month recall (13 for SEE, 13 for SET, 6 for ERDry and 6 for ERWet; p > 0.05). Fourteen restorations were detected as a minor marginal discoloration at the 18-month recall (6 for SEE, 6 for SET, 1 for ERDry and 1 for ERWet; p > 0.05). However, all of them were considered clinically acceptable. No restorations showed postoperative sensitivity and caries recurrence at this time.
Conclusions: The clinical performance of the Futurabond U did not depend on the bonding strategy employed and it was considered reliable when used associated to Admira Fusion unidoses resin composite after 18-month of clinical evaluation.