Clinical performance of a two-step self-etch adhesive with additional enamel etching in Class III cavities.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effect of additional enamel etching on the clinical performance of Class III composite restorations bonded with a mild two-step self-etch adhesive system in a three-year evaluation of clinical service. METHODS: Using a paired-tooth study design, 38 patients received at least one pair of restorations. In each paired cavity, a mild two-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond) was used, either with (C-SE etch) or without additional enamel etching, using phosphoric acid (C-SE non-etch). Clearfil AP-X was used as the restorative material for all restorations. Evaluation of the restorations was performed at baseline and after six months, one year, two years and three years of clinical service in terms of retention, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, postoperative sensitivity and secondary caries using the modified Ryge criteria. RESULTS: A retention rate of 100% both for the C-SE non-etch and C-SE etch groups was noted. Significant differences were observed between the groups regarding the marginal discoloration (p = 0.001) and marginal adaptation (p = 0.002) at three years. C-SE non-etch restorations revealed more small marginal defects and superficial marginal discoloration than the C-SE etch group. CONCLUSION: Although the clinical performance of the mild two-step self-etch adhesive in Class III cavities was found acceptable after three years, additional etching of the enamel margins improved the marginal quality of this adhesive by preventing small marginal defects and superficial marginal discolorations.

Clinical evaluation of a two-step etch&rinse and a two-step self-etch adhesive system in Class II restorations: two-year results.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the clinical performance of a two-step etch&rinse and a two-step self-etch adhesive system in Class II restorations after two years of clinical service. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with primary caries or insufficient restorations were enrolled in the study. A total of 87 Class II cavities were restored, 44 using a two-step etch&rinse adhesive system (Single Bond, 3M ESPE) and 43 cavities using a two-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray). Filtek Z250 (3M ESPE) was used as a restorative material for all the restorations. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, six months, and one and two years after placement for retention, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, postoperative sensitivity, secondary caries, color match and anatomical form, according to the modified Ryge criteria. RESULTS: At two years, the retention rates for Single Bond and Clearfil SE Bond were 94% and 100%, respectively, (p = 0.493). No significant differences were found between both groups for the other parameters evaluated. CONCLUSION: Both of the adhesive systems that were tested demonstrated similar clinical performance at the end of this two-year clinical trial.