Clinical evaluation of self-etch adhesives in Class V non-carious lesions

Ali I. Abdalla, Franklin García-Godoy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical performance of two self-etching and one total-etch adhesives in Class V non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL). Methods: Two self-etching primers, Clearfil SE Bond and Hybrid Bond, and one total etch adhesive, Admira Bond, were placed in 195 NCCL. Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 1 and 2 years using the USPHS criteria. Results: No restoration was lost after 1 and 2 years for all materials. There was no significant difference between the baseline and 2-year results for Admira Bond and Clearfil SE Bond restorations. In contrast, Hybrid Bond restorations showed significant deterioration in marginal adaptation and cavosurface marginal discoloration after 2 years. Also, there was no significant difference between Admira Bond and Clearfil SE Bond at each recall period.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)289-292
Number of pages4
JournalAmerican journal of dentistry
Volume19
Issue number5
StatePublished - Oct 1 2006

Fingerprint

Adhesives
United States Public Health Service
admira bond
Clearfil SE Bond
Hybrid Bond

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Clinical evaluation of self-etch adhesives in Class V non-carious lesions. / Abdalla, Ali I.; García-Godoy, Franklin.

In: American journal of dentistry, Vol. 19, No. 5, 01.10.2006, p. 289-292.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5fb3c21b21f144ab9c82a6a4343ce2ce,
title = "Clinical evaluation of self-etch adhesives in Class V non-carious lesions",
abstract = "Purpose: To evaluate the clinical performance of two self-etching and one total-etch adhesives in Class V non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL). Methods: Two self-etching primers, Clearfil SE Bond and Hybrid Bond, and one total etch adhesive, Admira Bond, were placed in 195 NCCL. Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 1 and 2 years using the USPHS criteria. Results: No restoration was lost after 1 and 2 years for all materials. There was no significant difference between the baseline and 2-year results for Admira Bond and Clearfil SE Bond restorations. In contrast, Hybrid Bond restorations showed significant deterioration in marginal adaptation and cavosurface marginal discoloration after 2 years. Also, there was no significant difference between Admira Bond and Clearfil SE Bond at each recall period.",
author = "Abdalla, {Ali I.} and Franklin Garc{\'i}a-Godoy",
year = "2006",
month = "10",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "289--292",
journal = "American Journal of Dentistry",
issn = "0894-8275",
publisher = "Mosher and Linder, Inc",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical evaluation of self-etch adhesives in Class V non-carious lesions

AU - Abdalla, Ali I.

AU - García-Godoy, Franklin

PY - 2006/10/1

Y1 - 2006/10/1

N2 - Purpose: To evaluate the clinical performance of two self-etching and one total-etch adhesives in Class V non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL). Methods: Two self-etching primers, Clearfil SE Bond and Hybrid Bond, and one total etch adhesive, Admira Bond, were placed in 195 NCCL. Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 1 and 2 years using the USPHS criteria. Results: No restoration was lost after 1 and 2 years for all materials. There was no significant difference between the baseline and 2-year results for Admira Bond and Clearfil SE Bond restorations. In contrast, Hybrid Bond restorations showed significant deterioration in marginal adaptation and cavosurface marginal discoloration after 2 years. Also, there was no significant difference between Admira Bond and Clearfil SE Bond at each recall period.

AB - Purpose: To evaluate the clinical performance of two self-etching and one total-etch adhesives in Class V non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL). Methods: Two self-etching primers, Clearfil SE Bond and Hybrid Bond, and one total etch adhesive, Admira Bond, were placed in 195 NCCL. Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 1 and 2 years using the USPHS criteria. Results: No restoration was lost after 1 and 2 years for all materials. There was no significant difference between the baseline and 2-year results for Admira Bond and Clearfil SE Bond restorations. In contrast, Hybrid Bond restorations showed significant deterioration in marginal adaptation and cavosurface marginal discoloration after 2 years. Also, there was no significant difference between Admira Bond and Clearfil SE Bond at each recall period.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33750314729&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33750314729&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 17073206

AN - SCOPUS:33750314729

VL - 19

SP - 289

EP - 292

JO - American Journal of Dentistry

JF - American Journal of Dentistry

SN - 0894-8275

IS - 5

ER -