Retention of tooth-colored restorations in non-carious cervical lesions--a systematic review.

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 materials placed in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs). METHODS: Randomized clinical trials with a minimum of 3 years of follow-up that evaluated the effectiveness of tooth-colored materials, adhesive systems, and preparation techniques for the restoration of NCCLs were selected. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE (OVID), the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database (LILACS), and Medline (OVID) electronic databases were searched from 1990 to 2013. RESULTS: Twenty-seven randomized clinical trials were included and reviewed. Meta-analysis was used to determine the relative risk of loss of tooth-colored NCCL restorations between different categories of adhesive systems. The effect of tooth preparation could not be similarly analyzed. 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.

Clinical evaluation of silorane-based and dimethacrylate-based resin composites: 1-year follow-up.

This study sought to evaluate the 1-year clinical performance of silorane-based and dimethacrylate-based Class II resin composite restorations using 2 bonding strategies. Eighty-two restorations were placed in 32 patients (median age 37 years) by a single operator. Only Class II restorations were included. Each patient received 1-2 pairs of resin composite restorations with both restoration materials. Between-group comparisons were made using an adjusted chi-square test and an adjusted McNemar's chi-square test to analyze the intrasystem data (α = 0.05). Both systems demonstrated acceptable clinical performance after 1 year.