Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A 13-year clinical evaluation of two three-step etch-and-rinse adhesives in non-carious class-V lesions

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This 13-year randomized clinical trial compared the clinical effectiveness of two three-step etch-and-rinse adhesives in combination with a hybrid, stiffer composite versus a micro-filled, more flexible composite. The influence of composite stiffness on the clinical performance of one of the adhesives was assessed as well. One hundred and forty-two non-carious cervical lesions were restored with composites with contrasting stiffness. Seventy-one patients randomly received two cervical restorations placed following two out of three adhesive procedures: (1) the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Permaquick applied with the stiff micro-hybrid composite Amelogen Hybrid (PMQ-H, Ultradent), (2) Permaquick applied with the more flexible micro-filled Amelogen Microfill (PMQ-M, Ultradent), or (3) the “gold-standard” three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Optibond FL applied with the micro-hybrid composite Prodigy (OFL-P, Kerr). The restorations were evaluated after 6 months, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 13 years of clinical service regarding their retention, marginal integrity and discoloration, caries occurrence, preservation of tooth vitality, and post-operative sensitivity. Retention loss, severe marginal defects, and/or discoloration that needed intervention (repair or replacement) and the occurrence of caries were considered as clinical failures. The recall rate at 13 years was 77%. Bond degradation after 13 years was mainly characterized by a further increase in the presence of small but clinically acceptable marginal defects and superficial marginal discoloration. Twelve percent of the OFL-P restorations were clinically unacceptable. In the PMQ group, 22% of the PMQ-M restorations and 26% of the PMQ-H restorations needed repair or replacement. Regarding the clinical failure rate, Optibond FL scored significantly better than Permaquick (McNemar; p = 0.015). No statistically significant differences were found between the micro-filled and the hybrid composite for each of the parameters evaluated (McNemar, p > 0.05). After 13 years of clinical functioning, the clinical effectiveness of the three adhesive/composite combinations remained highly acceptable.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Vijay P, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G (2003) Buonocore memorial lecture: adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent 28:215–235

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Frankenberger R, Pashley DH, Reich SM, Lohbauer U, Petschelt A, Tay F (2005) Characterisation of resin–dentine interfaces by compressive cyclic loading. Biomaterials 26:2043–2052

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Van Meerbeek B (2005) A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results. J Dent Res 84:118–132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Blunck U, Zaslansky (2007) Effectiveness of all-in-one adhesive systems tested by thermo-cycling following short and long-term water storage. J Adhes Dent 9:231–240

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Van Landuyt KL, Mine A, De Munck J, Jaecques S, Peumans M, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B (2009) Are one-step adhesives easier to use and better performing? Multifactorial assessment of contemporary one-step self-etching adhesives. J Adhes Dent 11:175–190

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hashimoto M (2010) A review—micromorphological evidence of degradation in resin–dentin bonds and potential preventional solutions. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 92B:268–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Mine A, Van Ende A, De Munck J (2010) Relationship between bond strength tests and clinical outcomes. Dent Mater 26:100–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Heintze SD, Ruffieux C, Rousson V (2010) Clinical performance of cervical restorations—a meta-analysis. J Adhes Dent 26:993–100

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pashley DH, Tay FR, Yiu C, Hashimoto M, Breschi L, Carvalho RM, Ito S (2004) Collagen degradation by host-derived enzymes during aging. J Dent Res 83:216–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hebling J, Pashley DH, Tjäderhane L, Tay F (2005) Chlorhexidine arrests subclinical degradation of dentin hybrid layers in vivo. J Dent Res 84:741–746. Erratum in: J Dent Res 2006; 85:384

    Google Scholar 

  11. De Munck J, Van den Steen PE, Mine A, Van Landuyt KL, Poitevin A, Opdenakker G, Van Meerbeek B (2009) Inhibition of enzymatic degradation of adhesive–dentin interfaces. J Dent Res 12:1101–1106

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nishiyama N, Suzuki K, Komatsu K, Yasuda S, Nemoto K (2002) A 13C NMR study on the adsorption characteristics of HEMA to dentinal collagen. J Dent Res 81:469–471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yoshida Y, Nagakane K, Fukuda R, Nakayami Y, Okazaki M, Shintani H, Inoue S, Tagawa Y, Suzuki Y, De Munck J, Van Meebeek B (2004) Comparative study on adhesive performance of functional monomers. J Dent Res 83:454–458

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Inoue S, Koshiro K, Yoshida Y, De Munck J, Nagakane K, Suzuki K, Sano H, Van Meerbeek B (2005) Hydrolytic stability of self-etch adhesives bonded to dentin. J Dent Res 84:1160–1164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Van Meerbeek B, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Peumans M (2004) A randomized, controlled trial evaluating the three-year clinical effectiveness of two etch & rinse adhesives in cervical lesions. Oper Dent 29:376–385

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Peumans M, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL, Kanumilli P, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B (2007) Restoring cervical lesions with flexible composites. Dent Mater 23:749–754

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Boghosian AA, Drummond JL, Lautenschlager E (2007) Clinical evaluation of a dentin adhesive system: 13 year results. J Dent Res 86 (Spec Issue A): abstract 228

  18. van Dijken JWV, Sunnegårdh-Grönberg LA (2007) Clinical long-term retention of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions. A 13 years evaluation. Dent Mater 23:1101–1117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. van Dijken JWV, Pallesen U (2008) Long-term dentin retention of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions. Dent Mater 24:915–922

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wilder AD, Swift EJ, Heymann HO, Ritter AV, Sturdevant JR, Bayne SC (2009) A 12-year clinical evaluation of a three-step dentin adhesive in noncarious cervical lesions. J Am Dent Assoc 140:526–535

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Vanherle G, Verschueren M, Lambrechts P, Braem M (1986) Clinical investigation of dental adhesive systems. Part I: an in vivo study. J Prosthet Dent 55:157–163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hickel R, Roulet JF, Bayne S, Heintze SD, Mjör IA, Peters M, Rousson V, Randall R, Schmalz G, Tyas M, Vanherle G (2007) Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials. Science Committee Project 2/98—FDI World Dental Federation. Study design (Part I) and criteria for evaluation (Part II) of direct and indirect restorations including onlays and partial crowns. J Adhes Dent 9:121–147

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Akimoto N, Takamizu M, Momoi Y (2007) 10-year clinical evaluation of a self-etching adhesive system. Oper Dent 32:3–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ritter AV, Swift EJ, Heymann HO, Sturdevant JR, Wilder AD (2009) An eight-year clinical evaluation of filled and unfilled one-bottle dental adhesives. J Am Dent Assoc 140:28–37

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ichim I, Li Q, Loughran J, Swain MV, Kieser J (2007) Restoration of non-carious cervical lesions. Part I. Modelling of restorative fracture. Dent Mater 23:1553–1561

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ichim IP, Schmidlin PR, Li Q, Kieser JA, Swain MV (2007) Restoration of non-carious cervical lesions. Part II. Restorative material selection to minimise fracture. Dent Mater 23:1562–1569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Suzuki K, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G (2003) Four year water degradation of total-etch adhesives bonded to dentin. J Dent Res 82:136–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Toledano M, Osorio R, Osorio E, Aguilera FS, Yamauti M, Pashley DH, Tay F (2007) Durability of resin–dentin bonds: effects of direct/indirect exposure and storage media. Dent Mater 23:885–892

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Abdalla AI, Feilzer AJ (2008) Four-year water degradation of a total-etch and two self-etching adhesives bonded to dentin. J Dent 36:611–617

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Frankenberger R, Lohbauer U, Roggendorf MJ, Naumann M, Taschner M (2008) Selective enamel etching reconsidered: better than etch-and-rinse and self-etch? J Adhes Dent 10:339–344

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Shirai K, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Lambrechts P, Suzuki K, Shintani H, Van Meerbeek B (2005) Effect of cavity configuration and aging on the bonding effectiveness of six adhesives to dentin. Dent Mater 21:110–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. De Munck J, Shirai K, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Suzuki K, Shintani H, Van Meerbeek B (2006) Effect of water storage on the bonding effectiveness of 6 adhesives to Class I cavity dentin. Oper Dent 31:456–465

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Van Landuyt KL, De Munck J, Mine A, Cardoso MV, Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B (2010) Self-etch bonding jeopardized by smear and filler debonding. J Dent Res 89:1045–1050

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Mine A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL, Poitevin A, Kuboki T, Yoshida Y, Suzuki K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B (2008) Bonding effectiveness and interfacial characterization of a HEMA/TEGDMA-free three-step etch&rinse adhesive. J Dent 36:767–773

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Braem M, Lambrechts P, Van Doren V, Vanherle G (1986) The impact of composite structure on its elastic response. J Dent Res 65:648–653

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Browning WD, Brackett WW, Gilpatrick RO (2000) Two-year clinical comparison of a microfilled and a hybrid resin-based composite in non-carious class V lesions. Oper Dent 25:46–50

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Tyas MJ, Burrow MF (2002) Three-year clinical evaluation of One-Step in non-carious cervical lesions. Am J Dent 15:309–311

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Çelik Ç, Özgünaltay G, Attar N (2003) Clinical evaluation of total-etch adhesives bonded to dentin. J Dent Res 82:136–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Turner EW, Shook LW, Ross JA, deRijk W, Eason BC (2008) Clinical evaluation of a flowable resin composite in non-carious class V lesions: two-year results. J Tennessee Dent Assoc 88:20–24

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kubo S, Yokota H, Yokota H, Hayashi Y (2010) Three-year clinical evaluation of a flowable and a hybrid resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent 38:191–200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kemp-Scholte CM, Davidson CL (1990) Marginal integrity related to bond strength and strain capacity of composite resin restorative systems. J Prosthet Dent 64:658–664

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Van Meerbeek B, Willems G, Celis JP, Roos JR, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G (1993) Assessment by nano-indentation of the hardness and elasticity of the resin–dentin bonding area. J Dent Res 72:1434–1442

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Bartlett DW, Shah P (2006) A critical review of non-carious cervical (wear) lesions and the role of abfraction, erosion and abrasion. J Dent Res 85:306–312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Rees JS, Hammadeh M (2004) Undermining of enamel as a mechanism of abfraction lesion formation: a finite element study. Eur J Oral Sci 112:347–352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Rees JS, Jacobsen PH (1998) The effect of cuspal flexure on a buccal Class V restoration: a finite element study. J Dent 26:361–367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Leuven BIOMAT Research Cluster, Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Oral Pathology and Maxillo-facial Surgery, Catholic University of Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 7, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Marleen Peumans, Jan De Munck, Kirsten L. Van Landuyt, Andre Poitevin, Paul Lambrechts & Bart Van Meerbeek

Authors
  1. Marleen Peumans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan De Munck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kirsten L. Van Landuyt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andre Poitevin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Paul Lambrechts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Bart Van Meerbeek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marleen Peumans.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Peumans, M., De Munck, J., Van Landuyt, K.L. et al. A 13-year clinical evaluation of two three-step etch-and-rinse adhesives in non-carious class-V lesions. Clin Oral Invest 16, 129–137 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0481-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0481-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation