RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the adhesion of universal adhesive systems to the dentin of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) by comparing the etch-and-rinse and self-etch strategies through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Systematic electronic searches were performed by two independent reviewers into the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library until December of 2021. Only randomized clinical trials were selected, comparing etch-and-rinse and self-etch strategies and using universal adhesive systems in NCCLs. This systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and registered into PROSPERO. RESULTS: After the removal of duplicates, 170 articles were identified. In an initial screening of titles and abstracts, 146 records did not satisfy the inclusion criteria and were, therefore, excluded. Twenty-four studies were eligible for evaluation of the full text, and four were excluded after this step. Finally, 20 randomized clinical trials were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that applying universal adhesive systems in the etch-and-rinse strategy could lead to better medium-term (>12 to 36 months) retention of NCCL restorations than the self-etch strategy, as well as resulting in lower percentages of marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, and secondary caries. However, the use of a self-etching strategy can lead to lower postoperative sensitivity.
