Effect of different types of adhesive systems on the bond strength and marginal integrity of composite restorations in cavities prepared with the erbium laser-a systematic review.

There are inconclusive results regarding etching and bonding protocol to achieve optimal bond strength and marginal integrity of adhesive composite resin restorations in erbium laser prepared cavities. This systematic review aimed to consider which adhesive system protocol may be optimal in achieving the bond strength and marginal integrity in erbium laser-prepared cavities, comparable to that obtained with conventional method of cavity preparation. This review was developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement with literature search based on all publications during the period January1, 2000-October 10, 2020, in three databases: MEDLINE, Google Scholar and ScienceDirect. The necessary information was extracted by two independent authors. The search resulted in 139 articles from all databases, and a total of thirty-one articles met the inclusion criteria. The results indicated that the selection of adhesives depending on their pH and composition and the laser pulse duration and pulse energy used plays an important role in predicting the adhesion and marginal integrity. The 10-MDP containing moderate self-etch adhesives has demonstrated predictable outcomes. Longer pulse durations used for cavity preparations may indicate the use of etch-and-rinse (EnR) or moderate self-etch adhesives (SEA) to allow better resin infiltration in deep craters formed due to laser irradiation. However, further studies with more standardizations in relation to adhesives and laser parameters are needed.

Six-year clinical evaluation of bulk-fill and nanofill resin composite restorations.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare the performance of a bulk-fill and a nanofill resin composite in class II restorations after 6 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients having at least two class II carious lesions were recruited for the study. One lesion in each patient was randomly assigned to be restored using either the Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TB) or Filtek Ultimate (FU) resin composites with their respective adhesives. One hundred four restorations were placed by two calibrated operators. Restorations were evaluated at baseline and annually over the course of 6 years by two examiners using modified USPHS criteria. Data were statistically analyzed using the Chi-square and Cochran Q tests (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Sixty-six restorations in 33 patients were evaluated after 6 years. Only one restoration was lost from FU group at 5 years. At the end of 6 years, marginal discoloration was observed in three (9.1%) TB and eight (36.4%) FU restorations creating a significant difference between the groups (p < 0.05). The FU group showed a significant increase in marginal discoloration at 6 years from the baseline (p < 0.05). Marginal adaptation was rated as Bravo for 9.1% and 24.2% of TB and FU restorations, respectively (p > 0.05). Significant degradation was observed within each group in terms of marginal adaptation (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for the other criteria tested (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Bulk-fill restorations performed better for marginal discoloration. The remaining clinical performance criteria of bulk-fill and nanofill resin composite restorations were similar after 6 years. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Bulk-fill resin might be a better alternative to incrementally placed restorative in terms of marginal discoloration under clinical conditions.

Thirty-six-month follow-up of cervical composite restorations placed with an MDP-free universal adhesive system using different adhesive protocols: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the influence of different application strategies on the clinical behavior of an MDP-free universal adhesive placed in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) over the course of 36 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one patients participated in this study (N = 31). One hundred twenty-four restorations were assigned to four groups: We used the self-etch strategy on groups with (SE-et) and without (SET) selective enamel etching, and the etch-and-rinse strategy on groups with dry (ER-D) and moist (ER-M) dentin. After applying the MDP-free universal adhesive (Xeno Select universal adhesive, Dentsply Sirona), cavities were filled using EvoluX composite resin (Dentsply Sirona). The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 36 months according to World Dental Federation (FDI) and US Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Friedman's repeated-measures analysis of variance rank (α = 0.05) was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: We evaluated the 31 patients after 36 months. Forty-two restorations were lost (ER-D = 5, ER-M = 7, SE-et = 14, SET = 16). The 36-month retention/fracture rates (95% confidence interval) were 83.9% for ER-D, 77.4% for ER-M, 54.9% for SE-et, and 48.4% for SET. ER strategy showed better retention rate than SE strategy (p < 0.05). Thirty-four restorations (ER-D = 6, ER-M = 10, SE-et = 10, SET = 8) showed marginal staining per FDI criteria and 15 restorations (ER-D = 1, ER-M = 2, SE-et = 6, SET = 6) showed marginal staining per USPHS criteria. No restorations showed postoperative sensitivity or recurrence of caries. CONCLUSION: The retention rate of Xeno Select universal adhesive was poor, mainly in the self-etch strategy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: REBEC clinical registry under protocol RBR-4wh4sh. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: MDP-free universal adhesive behavior depends on the bonding strategy used.

Thirty-six-month clinical evaluation of different adhesive strategies of a universal adhesive.

AIM: The aim of this clinical trial was to evaluate and compare the performance of a universal adhesive with different adhesive strategies in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) over a 36-month period. MATERIAL AND METHOD: One hundred sixty-five NCCLs in 35 patients (13 female, 22 male) with at least 3 lesions each were included in this study. Three groups were formed according to the adhesive strategy used (n = 55): selective-etch mode, etch-and-rinse mode, or self-etch mode of a universal adhesive, Single Bond Universal. The same nanofilled resin composite, Filtek Ultimate, was used for all restorations by a single operator. The restorations were evaluated by two calibrated examiners at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months in accordance with the modified USPHS criteria. The chi-square test was used for intergroup comparison and Cochran's Q test for intragroup comparison (∝ = 5%). RESULTS: At 36 months, the recall rate was 98.1% and three restorations, one from each group, had failed because of retention loss (P > 0.05). The self-etch mode group showed 17 bravo scores for both marginal staining and marginal adaptation after 3 years, which was significantly different from the selective-etch and etch-and-rinse groups (P < 0.05). For all groups, the only statistically significant difference was found when baseline and 36-month evaluations were compared in terms of marginal staining (P = 0.000). When the marginal adaptation values at 36 months were compared with those at the baseline, statistically significant differences were found in the etch-and-rinse and self-etch mode groups (P < 0.05). Neither secondary caries nor postoperative sensitivity was observed at any recall. CONCLUSION: All adhesive modes showed similar retention rates. Although all restorations were clinically acceptable, restorations in self-etch mode showed less satisfying performance for marginal staining and marginal adaptation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: At the end of 36 months, the Single Bond Universal adhesive received acceptable scores according to the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. However, clinicians should be aware that its use in self-etch application mode tends to result in marginal staining and marginal deterioration when compared with etch-and-rinse and selective-etch application modes.

Ceramic laminate veneers: effect of preparation design and ceramic thickness on fracture resistance and marginal quality in vitro.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of five different preparation designs and two different ceramic thicknesses on margin quality and fracture resistance of ceramic laminate veneers after thermomechanical loading in vitro. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty human central incisors were randomly assigned to 10 groups (n = 8) with five different preparation designs: non-prep (NP), minimally invasive (MI) = exclusively enamel-bonded, semi-invasive (SI) = 50% bonded in dentin, invasive (I) = 100% in dentin, and semi-invasive with two additional class III composite resin restorations (SI-C). IPS InLine veneers were fabricated in two thicknesses (L1 = 0.2-0.5 mm; L2 = 0.5-1.2 mm). After adhesive luting (OptiBond FL, Variolink Veneer) with light curing and polishing, specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 21 days, then thermocycled (2000 cycles between + 5 and + 55 °C), and finally mechanically loaded at the incisal edge at an angle of 45° for 2,000,000 cycles at 50 N und further 1,000,000 cycles at 100 N. Impressions were taken initially, after thermocycling, and after every 250,000 mechanical cycles in order to evaluate cracks and margin quality under a SEM. The veneers were evaluated in a light microscope (× 20) for cracks, chippings, partial, and catastrophic fractures. RESULTS: Margin quality after three million cycles revealed medians for continuous margin of 82-95% without significant differences among groups, neither at the ceramic/composite (p = 0.943) nor at the tooth/composite interface (p = 0.571). Visual inspection of veneers exhibited 22 cracks, 11 chippings, 4 partial and 4 catastrophic fractures in 38 of 80 veneers. The statistical ranking regarding fracture risk (p ≤ 0.05) was: IL1 = SIL1 = MIL1 = IL2 = CL1 = CL2, MIL2 = NPL1 = NPL2 = SIL2, IL2 = CL1 = CL2 = MIL2 = NPL1 = NPL2 = SIL2. CONCLUSIONS: Even after three million cycles with up to 100 N, all groups showed high survival rates. However, the fracture risk increases with thin veneers and preparations with medium to high dentin portions when compared to thicker veneers with preparations in enamel or partially in dentin (p ≤ 0.05). Preexisting resin composite restorations did not show any significant influence on margin quality and facture risk (p > 0.05). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Ceramic laminate veneers are extremely durable with thin veneers and substantial enamel loss being main risk factors for fracture.

Dentists' performance in dentin-composite resin bonding before and after hands-on course learning.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The restoration longevity depends on a high dentin-composite bond quality. This study investigated learning outcomes when using etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives among general practitioners in a hands-on bonding test course. METHODS: We recruited 30 general practitioners to perform shear bond strength (SBS) tests using five adhesives: one Peak® Universal Bond (PUB) etch-and-rinse and four Futurabond DC, Single Bond universal (SBU), Versa Optibond (VOB), and Tetric-N Bond Self-Etch (TNS) self-etch adhesives. SBS tests were conducted at pre-demonstration (pre-demo), post-demonstration (post-demo), and 24-h storage (delayed bonding) stages. SBS data were analyzed with paired Student's t-tests. We defined 17 MPa as "qualified bond strength (QBS)". The percentages of samples with SBS achieving QBS were analyzed using Mantel-Haenszel chi-square tests. The fracture surfaces of the samples were examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). RESULTS: Using PUB caused no significant differences in SBS between pre- and post-demo samples, whereas the SBS of the two self-etch adhesives (SBU and VOB) improved in post-demo samples (p < 0.05). SBU showed the highest percentage of samples with SBS achieving QBS in all three groups (pre-demo = 70%, post-demo = 83%, and delayed bonding = 76.5%). The QBS percentages of VOB and TNS notably improved from 0% (pre-demo) to 71.4% and 23.5% (post-demo), respectively. SEM indicated bubble-like defects at the dentin-resin interfaces in cases of low SBS. CONCLUSION: Bonding performance is both operator- and product-dependent. The continuing education hands-on course does help dentists to improve the bond strength especially when the self-etch system is used.

In Vitro Evaluation of Different Protocols for Preventing Microleakage of Fissure Sealants Placed Following Saliva Contamination.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of different enamel conditioning protocols and their re-application on the microleakage of fissure sealants placed following saliva contamination. STUDY DESIGN: The study included 156 human third molars in 16 subgroups (2×4×2) under two main groups (sealant type): Group A- hydrophobic resin sealant, 3M Clinpro™ Sealant; Group B- hydrophilic resin sealant, Ultraseal XT Hydro. Each group was then divided according to the type of surface conditioning; 1- Er,Cr:YSSG laser etching, 2- acid-etching, 3- acid-etching+etch-and-rinse adhesive (Prime&Bond® One Select) and 4- self-etching adhesive (Clearfil™ SE Bond). After contaminating the conditioned occlusal enamel surfaces with artificial saliva, fissure sealant was applied in half of the specimens (a), whereas in the other half, (b) the respective surface conditioning was repeated and then fissure sealant was placed. Following thermocycling, the samples were immersed in basic fuchsin, sectioned, and dye penetration was quantitatively assessed with ImageJ. Two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used for statistical analyses (p<0.05). RESULTS: The least microleakage was observed in A3b and A3a, whereas B4b and B4a were the subgroups with the highest microleakage. Following saliva contamination, when surface conditioning was not re-applied, the effects of fissure sealant types and surface conditioning were significant (p=0.005 and p<0.001, respectively). However, their interaction was insignificant (p=0.173). When surface conditioning was re-applied after saliva contamination, the effects of type of fissure sealant and surface conditioning (p=0.000, for both) and their interaction (p=0.004) were significant. CONCLUSIONS: 3M Clinpro™ Sealant was superior to Ultraseal XT Hydro. Re-application of Er,Cr:YSSG laser and the self-etching adhesive did not affect the microleakage of both fissure sealants. Without re-application, acid-etching+etch-and-rinse adhesive was superior to acid-etching only. However, both of them were similarly successful when they were re-applied following saliva contamination.

How "Universal" is Adhesion? Shear Bond Strength of Multi-mode Adhesives to Enamel and Dentin.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the shear bond strength of different universal adhesives to enamel and dentin with and without additional phosphoric acid etching before and after thermocycling (TC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The mesial, distal, lingual, and buccal surfaces of the teeth were ground flat to expose two enamel areas and two dentin areas. Specimens were randomly divided into 36 groups (n = 10). Four adhesives were tested: Scotchbond Universal (SBU), Prime & Bond Elect (PBE), All-Bond Universal (ABU), and iBond Universal (IBU). The application was performed in the self-etch mode (SE) or in the etch-and-rinse mode (ER). Optibond FL (OFL) was used as an etch-and-rinse control. After composite buildups were made, half of the groups were tested before and the other half after TC. The failure mode was evaluated using a light microscope. RESULTS: In enamel, mean bond strengths ranged from 13.4 to 21.9 MPa in the SE mode before TC. When used as an ER adhesive, mean bond strengths exceeded 30 MPa. TC did not influence the mean bond strengths in either application mode. Regarding dentin, significant differences in the SE mode were adhesive dependent. Differences were only detected between SBU and IBU before TC and were not present after TC. When SBU, PBE, and ABU were used as ER adhesives, no differences were detected before TC. TC only affected IBU when compared to the other adhesives. CONCLUSION: Universal adhesives benefit from phosphoric acid etching, as bond strengths increased especially at enamel surfaces.

Demineralized enamel reduces margin integrity of self-etch, but not of etch-and-rinse bonded composite restorations.

The aim of this study was to investigate margin integrity of Class V composite restorations in demineralized and sound enamel after bonding with different etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesive systems. Out of a total of 60 specimens from bovine incisors, 30 specimens were demineralized (21 days, acid buffer, pH 4.95) to create artificial enamel lesions. Circular Class V cavities were prepared in all 60 specimens and treated with either an unfilled etch-and-rinse adhesive (Syntac Classic; Ivoclar Vivadent), a filled etch-and-rinse adhesive (Optibond FL; Kerr), or a self-etch adhesive (iBond Self Etch; Heraeus) (n = 10 per group). The cavities were restored with a nanofilled resin composite and thermocycled (5000×, 5-55 °C). Scanning electron microscopy was used to evaluate margin integrity of the composite restorations, and the percentage of continuous margin was statistically analyzed (α = 0.05). Demineralized enamel led to a significantly lower margin integrity when the self-etch adhesive iBond Self Etch was applied, but did not affect margin integrity when the etch-and-rinse adhesives Optibond FL (filled) or Syntac Classic (unfilled) were used. No significant differences in margin integrity in sound and demineralized enamel were observed between the different adhesives. Demineralized enamel reduces margin integrity of composite restorations when bonded with a self-etch adhesive, but does not affect margin integrity when an etch-and-rinse approach is used.

Internal and marginal adaptation of high-viscosity bulk-fill composites in class II cavities placed with different adhesive strategies.

The aim of this study was to evaluate internal and marginal adaptation of high-viscosity bulk-fill composites to enamel and dentin with a self-etch (SE) and an etch-and-rinse adhesive (ER) without and with artificial aging. 128 MOD cavities in extracted human molars were prepared, randomly assigned to 8 groups (n = 16), bonded with either OptiBond FL (OFL, ER) or Xeno V+ (X, SE), and restored in 4 mm horizontal bulk layers with SonicFill (SF), Tetric EvoCeram Bulk fill (TEC), and x-tra fil (XF). Incremental layering technique with Premise (P) served as control. Half of the specimens each (n = 8) were subjected either to water storage (1 day, 37 °C) or prolonged storage (180 days) and thereafter thermocycling. Replicas were analyzed for marginal gap formation. After sectioning, interfacial adhesive defects were assessed. Results were statistical analyzed. (1) Internal adaptation: Except for TEC/OFL at enamel without artificial aging, no significant differences between bulk-fill composites and the control were observed. All groups at dentin with OFL showed less internal adhesive defects than that with X (p < 0.05). (2) Marginal adaptation: No significant differences were observed between bulk-fill composites and control except for P after artificial aging (p > 0.05). All other composites, regardless of artificial aging, formed significantly more marginal gaps at enamel with X compared to with OFL (p ≤ 0.05). Simplified restorations with high-viscosity bulk-fill composite showed comparable internal and marginal adaptation to incrementally placed fillings. A superiority of the 3-step ER approach was seen compared to the 1-step SE adhesive irrespective of the bulk-fill composite used.