A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month randomized multi-center clinical trial
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista Brasileira de Odontologia |
Texto Completo: | https://revista.aborj.org.br/index.php/rbo/article/view/999 |
Resumo: | The objective of this multi-centric, double-blind, randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical performance of a new universal adhesive system (Futurabond U, Voco GbmH, Germany) when applied with different application strategies over a period of six months. For this, 200 restorations were performed on non-carious cervical lesions using the adhesive Futurabond U in the four adhesive strategies (n=50 per group): self-etch without previous conditioner (SEE); self-etch associated with selective enamel etching (SET); etch-and-rinse with dry dentin (ERDry) and; etch-and-rinse with wet dentin (ERWet). After the use of the adhesive system, the cavities were restored with Admira Fusion composite resin (Voco GmbH). After 6 months of clinical performance, these restorations were evaluated according to FDI criteria in the following items: retention/fracture, marginal adaptation, marginal staining, postoperative sensitivity and caries recurrence. Seven restorations were lost/fractured after six months of clinical evaluation (2 in the SEE group, 1 in the SET group, 1 in the ERDry group, and 3 in the ERWet group). The retention rates for six months (95% confidence interval) were 96% (86%-98%) for the SEE group, 98% (89%-99%) for the SET group, 98% (89%-99%) for the ERDry group and 94% (83%-97%) for the ERWet group, with no statistical difference identified between any pair of groups (p> 0.05). Twenty-four restorations presented small marginal adaptation defects at the six-months evaluation recall, and all of them were considered clinically acceptable. The clinical performance of the universal adhesive Futurabond U associated to Admira Fusion unidoses resin composite was found to be promise after 6-month of clinical evaluation when applied in noncarious cervical lesions and it was not depending on the bonding strategy employed. |
id |
ABO-1_c63eba7bcb838db8eb8a7637df81c205 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:revista_aborj_org_br.www.revista.aborj.org.br:article/999 |
network_acronym_str |
ABO-1 |
network_name_str |
Revista Brasileira de Odontologia |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month randomized multi-center clinical trialUm novo adesivo universal simplificado: ensaio clínico multicêntrico randomizado de 6 mesesDENTAL MEDICINE (DENTISTRY)Adhesion; Acid etching; Composite restorationMEDICINA DENTÁRIA (ODONTOLOGIA)Técnicas adesivas; Auto-gravura; Restaurações dentárias; Longevidade clínicaThe objective of this multi-centric, double-blind, randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical performance of a new universal adhesive system (Futurabond U, Voco GbmH, Germany) when applied with different application strategies over a period of six months. For this, 200 restorations were performed on non-carious cervical lesions using the adhesive Futurabond U in the four adhesive strategies (n=50 per group): self-etch without previous conditioner (SEE); self-etch associated with selective enamel etching (SET); etch-and-rinse with dry dentin (ERDry) and; etch-and-rinse with wet dentin (ERWet). After the use of the adhesive system, the cavities were restored with Admira Fusion composite resin (Voco GmbH). After 6 months of clinical performance, these restorations were evaluated according to FDI criteria in the following items: retention/fracture, marginal adaptation, marginal staining, postoperative sensitivity and caries recurrence. Seven restorations were lost/fractured after six months of clinical evaluation (2 in the SEE group, 1 in the SET group, 1 in the ERDry group, and 3 in the ERWet group). The retention rates for six months (95% confidence interval) were 96% (86%-98%) for the SEE group, 98% (89%-99%) for the SET group, 98% (89%-99%) for the ERDry group and 94% (83%-97%) for the ERWet group, with no statistical difference identified between any pair of groups (p> 0.05). Twenty-four restorations presented small marginal adaptation defects at the six-months evaluation recall, and all of them were considered clinically acceptable. The clinical performance of the universal adhesive Futurabond U associated to Admira Fusion unidoses resin composite was found to be promise after 6-month of clinical evaluation when applied in noncarious cervical lesions and it was not depending on the bonding strategy employed.Objetivo: o objetivo deste ensaio clínico randomizado, duplo-cego e multicêntrico foi avaliar o desempenho clínico de um novo sistema adesivo universal (Futurabond U, Voco GbmH, Alemanha) quando aplicado com diferentes estratégias de aplicação durante um período de seis meses. Material e Métodos: para isso, foram realizadas 200 restaurações em lesões cervicais não cariosas, utilizando o adesivo Futurabond U de acordo com quatro estratégias adesivas (n = 50 por grupo): autocondicionante sem condicionador prévio (SEE); autocondicionante associado ao condicionamento seletivo do esmalte (SET); etch-and-enxaguar com dentina seca (ERDry) e; etch-and-enxaguar com dentina úmida (ERWet). Após a hibridização, as cavidades foram restauradas usando resina composta Admira Fusion (Voco GmbH). Após 6 meses de desempenho clínico, essas restaurações foram avaliadas de acordo com os critérios do IDE nos seguintes itens: retenção / fratura, adaptação marginal, coloração marginal, sensibilidade pós-operatória e recorrência de cárie. Resultados: sete restaurações foram perdidas / fraturadas após seis meses de avaliação clínica (2 no grupo SEE, 1 no grupo SET, 1 no grupo ERDry e 3 no grupo ERWet). As taxas de retenção por seis meses (intervalo de confiança de 95%) foram 96% (86% -98%) para o grupo SEE, 98% (89% -99%) para o grupo SET, 98% (89% -99%) para o grupo ERDry e 94% (83% -97%) para o grupo ERWet, sem diferença estatística identificada entre qualquer par de grupos (p> 0,05). Vinte e quatro restaurações apresentaram pequenos defeitos de adaptação marginal no recordatório de avaliação de seis meses, e todas foram consideradas clinicamente aceitáveis. Conclusão: o desempenho clínico do adesivo universal Futurabond U associado ao composto de resina unidoses Admira Fusion foi promissor após 6 meses de avaliação clínica quando aplicado em lesões cervicais não cariosas e não dependeu da estratégia de colagem empregada.Associação Brasileira de Odontologia - Seção Rio de JaneiroAlbuquerque, Elisa Gomes deSantana, Flavio Warol KlenCalazans, Fernanda SignorelliPoubel, Luiz AugustoMarins, Stella SoaresMatos, Thalita de ParisHanzen, Taíse AlessandraBarceleiro, Marcos de OliveiraLoguercio, Alessandro Dourado2017-12-27info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionOriginal ArticleArtigo originalapplication/pdfhttps://revista.aborj.org.br/index.php/rbo/article/view/99910.18363/rbo.v74n4.p.251Revista Brasileira de Odontologia; v. 74, n. 4 (2017); 251Revista Brasileira de Odontologia; v. 74, n. 4 (2017); 2511984-3747reponame:Revista Brasileira de Odontologiainstname:Associação Brasileira de Odontologia (ABO)instacron:ABOenghttps://revista.aborj.org.br/index.php/rbo/article/view/999/657Direitos autorais 2017 Rev. Bras. Odontol.http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2019-01-04T14:20:53Zoai:revista_aborj_org_br.www.revista.aborj.org.br:article/999Revistahttps://revista.aborj.org.br/index.php/rboONGhttp://www.revista.aborj.org.br/index.php/rbo/oaihttps://revista.aborj.org.br/index.php/rbo/oai0034-72721984-3747opendoar:2019-01-04T14:20:53Revista Brasileira de Odontologia - Associação Brasileira de Odontologia (ABO)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month randomized multi-center clinical trial Um novo adesivo universal simplificado: ensaio clínico multicêntrico randomizado de 6 meses |
title |
A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month randomized multi-center clinical trial |
spellingShingle |
A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month randomized multi-center clinical trial Albuquerque, Elisa Gomes de DENTAL MEDICINE (DENTISTRY) Adhesion; Acid etching; Composite restoration MEDICINA DENTÁRIA (ODONTOLOGIA) Técnicas adesivas; Auto-gravura; Restaurações dentárias; Longevidade clínica |
title_short |
A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month randomized multi-center clinical trial |
title_full |
A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month randomized multi-center clinical trial |
title_fullStr |
A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month randomized multi-center clinical trial |
title_full_unstemmed |
A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month randomized multi-center clinical trial |
title_sort |
A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month randomized multi-center clinical trial |
author |
Albuquerque, Elisa Gomes de |
author_facet |
Albuquerque, Elisa Gomes de Santana, Flavio Warol Klen Calazans, Fernanda Signorelli Poubel, Luiz Augusto Marins, Stella Soares Matos, Thalita de Paris Hanzen, Taíse Alessandra Barceleiro, Marcos de Oliveira Loguercio, Alessandro Dourado |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Santana, Flavio Warol Klen Calazans, Fernanda Signorelli Poubel, Luiz Augusto Marins, Stella Soares Matos, Thalita de Paris Hanzen, Taíse Alessandra Barceleiro, Marcos de Oliveira Loguercio, Alessandro Dourado |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Albuquerque, Elisa Gomes de Santana, Flavio Warol Klen Calazans, Fernanda Signorelli Poubel, Luiz Augusto Marins, Stella Soares Matos, Thalita de Paris Hanzen, Taíse Alessandra Barceleiro, Marcos de Oliveira Loguercio, Alessandro Dourado |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
DENTAL MEDICINE (DENTISTRY) Adhesion; Acid etching; Composite restoration MEDICINA DENTÁRIA (ODONTOLOGIA) Técnicas adesivas; Auto-gravura; Restaurações dentárias; Longevidade clínica |
topic |
DENTAL MEDICINE (DENTISTRY) Adhesion; Acid etching; Composite restoration MEDICINA DENTÁRIA (ODONTOLOGIA) Técnicas adesivas; Auto-gravura; Restaurações dentárias; Longevidade clínica |
description |
The objective of this multi-centric, double-blind, randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical performance of a new universal adhesive system (Futurabond U, Voco GbmH, Germany) when applied with different application strategies over a period of six months. For this, 200 restorations were performed on non-carious cervical lesions using the adhesive Futurabond U in the four adhesive strategies (n=50 per group): self-etch without previous conditioner (SEE); self-etch associated with selective enamel etching (SET); etch-and-rinse with dry dentin (ERDry) and; etch-and-rinse with wet dentin (ERWet). After the use of the adhesive system, the cavities were restored with Admira Fusion composite resin (Voco GmbH). After 6 months of clinical performance, these restorations were evaluated according to FDI criteria in the following items: retention/fracture, marginal adaptation, marginal staining, postoperative sensitivity and caries recurrence. Seven restorations were lost/fractured after six months of clinical evaluation (2 in the SEE group, 1 in the SET group, 1 in the ERDry group, and 3 in the ERWet group). The retention rates for six months (95% confidence interval) were 96% (86%-98%) for the SEE group, 98% (89%-99%) for the SET group, 98% (89%-99%) for the ERDry group and 94% (83%-97%) for the ERWet group, with no statistical difference identified between any pair of groups (p> 0.05). Twenty-four restorations presented small marginal adaptation defects at the six-months evaluation recall, and all of them were considered clinically acceptable. The clinical performance of the universal adhesive Futurabond U associated to Admira Fusion unidoses resin composite was found to be promise after 6-month of clinical evaluation when applied in noncarious cervical lesions and it was not depending on the bonding strategy employed. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-12-27 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Original Article Artigo original |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://revista.aborj.org.br/index.php/rbo/article/view/999 10.18363/rbo.v74n4.p.251 |
url |
https://revista.aborj.org.br/index.php/rbo/article/view/999 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.18363/rbo.v74n4.p.251 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revista.aborj.org.br/index.php/rbo/article/view/999/657 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Direitos autorais 2017 Rev. Bras. Odontol. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Direitos autorais 2017 Rev. Bras. Odontol. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Brasileira de Odontologia - Seção Rio de Janeiro |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Brasileira de Odontologia - Seção Rio de Janeiro |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Odontologia; v. 74, n. 4 (2017); 251 Revista Brasileira de Odontologia; v. 74, n. 4 (2017); 251 1984-3747 reponame:Revista Brasileira de Odontologia instname:Associação Brasileira de Odontologia (ABO) instacron:ABO |
instname_str |
Associação Brasileira de Odontologia (ABO) |
instacron_str |
ABO |
institution |
ABO |
reponame_str |
Revista Brasileira de Odontologia |
collection |
Revista Brasileira de Odontologia |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Odontologia - Associação Brasileira de Odontologia (ABO) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
https://revista.aborj.org.br/index.php/rbo/oai |
_version_ |
1798313204922712064 |