Eight-year randomized clinical evaluation of Class II nanohybrid resin composite restorations bonded with a one-step self-etch or a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Jan W. V. van Dijken ; Ulla Pallesen
• 关键词：Dental restorations ; Clinical ; Composite resin ; Nano ; Posterior ; Self ; etch adhesive
• 刊名：Clinical Oral Investigations
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：July 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：19
• 期：6
• 页码：1371-1379
• 全文大小：199 KB
• 参考文献：1.Saunders SA (2009) Current practicality of nanotechnology in dentistry. Part 1: focus on nanocomposite restoratives and biomimetics. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 1:47-1PubMed Central PubMed View Article
  2.Chen MH (2010) Update on dental nanocomposites. J Dent Res 89:549-60PubMed View Article
  3.Polydorou O, K?nig A, Hellwig E, Kümmerer K (2009) Long-term release of monomers from modern dental composite materials. Eur J Oral Sci 117:68-5PubMed View Article
  4.Zimmerli B, Strub M, Jeger F, Stadler O, Lussi A (2010) Composite materials: composition, properties and clinical applications. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 120:972-79PubMed
  5.Manhart J, Trumm C (2007) Microleakage of XP Bond in Class II cavities after artificial aging. J Adhes Dent 9:261-64PubMed
  6.Ilie N, Hickel R (2009) Investigations on mechanical behaviour of dental composites. Clin Oral Investig 13:427-38PubMed View Article
  7.Hahnel S, Henrich A, Bürgers R, Handel G, Rosentritt M (2010) Investigation of mechanical properties of modern dental composites after artificial aging for one year. Oper Dent 35:412-19PubMed View Article
  8.Monteiro PM, Manso MC, Gavinha S, Melo P (2010) Two-year clinical evaluation of packable and nanostructured resin-based composites placed with two techniques. JADA 141:319-29PubMed
  9.Schirrmeister JF, Huber K, Hellwig E, Hahn P (2009) Four-year evaluation of a resin composite including nanofillers in posterior cavities. J Adhes Dent 11:399-04PubMed
  10.van Dijken JWV, Pallesen U (2011) Four-year clinical evaluation of Class II nano-hybrid resin composite restorations bonded with a one-step self-etch and a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive. J Dent 39:16-5PubMed View Article
  11.Van Meerbeek B, Van Landuyt K, De Munck J, Hashimoto M, Peumans M, Lambrechts P, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Suzuki K (2005) Technique-sensitivity of contemporary adhesives. Dent Mater J 24:1-3PubMed View Article
  12.Skupien JA, Susin AH, Angst PDM, Anes R, Machado P, Bortolotto T, Krejci I (2010) Micromorphological effects and the thickness of the hybrid layer—a comparison of current adhesive systems. J Adhes Dent 12:435-42PubMed
  13.De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, Poitivin 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 84:118-32PubMed View Article
  14.Tay FR, King NM, Chan KM, Pashley DH (2002) How can nanoleakage occur in self-etching adhesive systems that demineralize and infiltrate simultaneously? J Adhes Dent 4:255-69PubMed
  15.Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B (2005) Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives: a systematic review of current clinical trials. Dent Mater 21:864-81PubMed View Article
  16.Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Poitivin E, Mine A, Van Ende A, De Munck J (2010) Relationship between bond strength tests and clinical outcomes. Dent Mater 26:e100–e121PubMed View Article
  17.van Dijken JWV, Sunneg?rdh-Gr?nberg K, Lindberg A (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 23:1101-107PubMed View Article
  18.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 24:915-22PubMed View Article
  19.van Dijken JWV (2010) A prospective 8-year evaluation of a mild two-step self-etching adhesive and a heavily filled two-step etch-and-rinse system in non-carious cervical lesions. Dent Mater 26:940-46PubMed View Article
  20.van Dijken JWV (2013) A 6-year prospective evaluation of a one-step HEMA-free self etching adhesive in Class II restorations. Dent Mater 29:1116-122PubMed View Article
  21.van Dijken JWV (2013) A randomized controlled 5-year prospective study of two HEMAfree adhesives, a 1-step self etching and a 3-step etch-and-rinse, in non-carious cervical lesions. Dent Mater 29:e271–e280PubMed View Article
  22.van Dijken JWV (1986) A clinical evaluation of anterior conventional, microfiller and hybrid composite resin fillings. A six year follow up study. Acta Odontol Scand 44:357-67PubMed View Article
  23.Isokangas P, Alanen P, Tiekso J (1993) The clinician’s ability to identify caries risk subjects without saliva tests—a pilot study. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 21:8-0PubMed View Article
  24.Sepp? L, Hausen H, P?ll?nen L, Helasharju K, Karkkainen S (1989) Past caries recording made in Public Dental Clinics as predictors of caries prevalence in early adolescence. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 17:277-81PubMed View Article
  25.Siegel S (1956) Nonparametric statistics. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc, New York, pp 166-72
  26.Fleming GJP, Hall DP, Shortall ACC, Burke FJT (2005) Cuspal movement and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with posterior filling materials
• 作者单位：Jan W. V. van Dijken (1)
  Ulla Pallesen (2)
  
  1. Department of Odontology, Dental School Ume?, Faculty of Medicine, Ume? University, SE-901 87, Ume?, Sweden
  2. Institute of Odontology, Faculty of Health Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
  
• 刊物类别：Medicine
• 刊物主题：Dentistry
  
• 出版者：Springer Berlin / Heidelberg
• ISSN：1436-3771

文摘

Objectives The aim of this study is to observe the durability of Class II nanohybrid resin composite restorations, placed with two different adhesive systems, in an 8-year follow-up. Methods Seventy-eight participants received at random at least two Class II restorations of the ormocer-based nanohybrid resin composite (Ceram X) bonded with either a one-step self-etch adhesive (Xeno III) or a control two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (Excite). The 165 restorations were evaluated using slightly modified United States Public Health Services (USPHS) criteria at baseline and then yearly during 8?years. Results One hundred and fifty-eight restorations were evaluated after 8?years. Three participants with five restorations (three Xeno III, two Excite) were registered as dropouts. Twenty-one failed restorations (13.3?%) were observed during the follow-up. Twelve in the one-step self-etch adhesive group (13.5?%) and nine in the two-step etch-and-rinse group (13.0?%). This resulted in nonsignificant different annual failure rates of 1.69 and 1.63?%, respectively. Fracture of restoration was the main reason for failure. Conclusion Good clinical performance was shown during the 8-year evaluation and no significant difference in overall clinical performance between the two adhesives. Fracture was the main reason for failure. Clinical relevance The one-step self-etch adhesive showed a good long-term clinical effectiveness in combination with the nanohybrid resin composite in Class II restorations.