Haak Rainer, Werner Melissa Sophie, Schneider Hartmut, Häfer Matthias, Schulz-Kornas Ellen
Department of Cariology, Endodontology and Periodontology, University of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 12, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
J Clin Med. 2022 Nov 23;11(23):6910. doi: 10.3390/jcm11236910.
The effectiveness of a universal adhesive applied in different application modes for the preparation of Class V composite restorations was evaluated both clinically and by quantitative marginal analysis (QMA). In each of the 22 patients, four non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL) were restored with Filtek Supreme XTE (3M). The adhesive Scotchbond Universal (SBU, 3M) was applied in self-etch (SE), selective-enamel-etch (SEE) or etch-and-rinse (ER) modes. The etch-and-rinse adhesive OptiBond FL (OFL, Kerr) served as a control. The restorations were clinically evaluated (FDI criteria) after 14 days (BL), 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Additionally, QMA was conducted on all restorations of 11 randomly selected patients. The FDI criteria and marginal gap were statistically compared between the groups at each recall as well as for the time periods between recalls. The cumulative failure rate was non-significantly higher in the OFL group when compared to all of the SBU groups. Marginal adaptation in the OFL and SBU-SE/ER groups was significantly decreased (BL-36 m, : 0.004) in comparison to the SBU-SEE group (BL-36 m, : 0.063). More marginal gaps were found in the OFL group than in the SBU-SEE (BL to 36 m, : 0.063-0.003) and SBU-ER (24/36 m, : 0.066/0.005) groups as well as in the SBU-SE group when compared to the SBU-SEE (12-36 m, ≤ 0.016) and SBU-ER (24/36 m, : 0.055/0.001) groups. SBU-SEE performed most effectively. The clinical evaluation and QMA corresponded, yet QMA detected group differences earliest after 6 months and is thus a valuable extension to clinical evaluations.
通过临床评估和定量边缘分析(QMA),对一种通用型粘结剂在不同应用模式下用于制备V类复合树脂修复体的有效性进行了评估。在22名患者中,每名患者的4个非龋性颈部病变(NCCL)均采用Filtek Supreme XTE(3M公司)进行修复。粘结剂Scotchbond Universal(SBU,3M公司)以自酸蚀(SE)、选择性釉质酸蚀(SEE)或酸蚀冲洗(ER)模式应用。酸蚀冲洗粘结剂OptiBond FL(OFL,Kerr公司)用作对照。在14天(基线)、6、12、24和36个月后对修复体进行临床评估(FDI标准)。此外,对11名随机选择患者的所有修复体进行了QMA。在每次复查时以及复查之间的时间段,对各组之间的FDI标准和边缘间隙进行统计学比较。与所有SBU组相比,OFL组的累积失败率略高,但无统计学意义。与SBU-SEE组(基线至36个月,P = 0.063)相比,OFL组和SBU-SE/ER组的边缘适应性显著降低(基线至36个月,P = 0.004)。与SBU-SEE组(12至36个月,P≤0.016)和SBU-ER组(24/36个月,P = ;0.055/0.001)相比,OFL组以及SBU-SE组中发现的边缘间隙比SBU-SEE组(基线至36个月,P = 0.063-0.003)和SBU-ER组(24/36个月,P = 0.066/0.005)更多。SBU-SEE模式效果最佳。临床评估和QMA结果相符,但QMA在6个月后最早检测到组间差异,因此是临床评估的有价值补充。