W. W. Brackett

Two-Year Clinical Performance of Clearfil SE and Clearfil S3 in Restoration of Unabraded Non-carious Class V Lesions

This study was undertaken to evaluate the two-year clinical performance of a self-etching primer and a self-etching adhesive, both of which employ the same acidic monomer. Forty pairs of restorations of AP-X hybrid resin composite (Kuraray Co, Ltd, Osaka, Japan) were placed in caries-free cervical erosion/abfraction lesions. Based on insensitivity to air, the dentin in 62% of these lesions was considered to be sclerotic. The restorations were placed with no abrasion of tooth surfaces, except for cleaning with plain pumice and no use of phosphoric acid etching, which is counter to the manufacturers instructions that call for etching of unprepared enamel. One restoration from each pair was placed using Clearfil SE Bond, an adhesive employing a self-etching primer, and the other was placed using Clearfil S3 Bond, a self-etching adhesive. To emulate the results likely to occur in a private practice, the restorations were placed by well-educated, experienced clinicians who had no particular expertise in adhesive dentistry research and who placed the restorations according only to their interpretation of the manufacturers instructions. The restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline and at 6, 12 and 24 months, using modified Ryge/USPHS criteria. For both products, retention of 81%-84% of the restorations was observed over two years, which is lower than has been previously observed with these products and is likely due to limitations in the manufacturers instructions compounded by inexperience of the operators in adhesive dentistry research. One restoration placed with each adhesive demonstrated secondary caries, which was probably attributable to the study being conducted in a non-fluoridated area and which reduced the percentages of clinically successful restorations to 78%-81%. No statistically significant difference (p = 0.50) between the two adhesives was observed in overall performance.

Clinical evaluation of two adhesive composite cements for the suppression of dentinal cold sensitivity

STATEMENT OF PROBLEMS Postoperative cold sensitivity after the cementation of indirect restorations with composite cements has been reported frequently but not scientifically documented. PURPOSE This controlled clinical study was designed to simulate the dentin/composite cement interface immediately after cementation of a cast restoration. The desensitizing capabilities of a composite cement that contains a self-etching, dual-polymerizing resin adhesive system were compared with those of a composite cement that use phosphoric acid etching followed by a single-bottle, light-activated primer/resin-based adhesive. MATERIAL AND METHODS The hypersensitive root surfaces of selected teeth were randomized to receive 1 of 3 treatments: coating with a self-etching adhesive (Linkmax) and its respective cement, coating with a conventionally etched adhesive (RelyX ARC) and its cement, or no treatment (negative control). The sample size was 22. Dentin sensitivity was ascertained with an accurate cold testing device that slowly decreased in temperature. Tooth sensitivity was measured both immediately and at 7 days after placement. Two-way analysis of variance and Fishers least significant difference test (P<.05) were used to determine whether significant differences existed as a function of treatment type or time. RESULTS Immediately after placement, the self-etching adhesive and its respective cement resulted in more suppression of cold sensitivity than no treatment (control); with Linkmax treatment, the temperature at which teeth responded was reduced by 8.4 degrees C. The conventionally etched adhesive and its cement reduced the temperature at which teeth responded by 9.4 degrees C. After 1 week, these temperature reductions were 7.0 degrees C and 4.3 degrees C, respectively. Untreated controls at the 2 intervals showed a mean decrease in sensitivity to cold of 3.6 degrees C and 4.1 degrees C. Statistical analysis showed type of composite cement to be a significant factor. CONCLUSION Within the limitations of this study and in comparison to untreated control teeth, Linkmax treatment resulted in a significant reduction in tooth root sensitivity over 1 week (P=.02), whereas RelyX ARC did not (P=.066).

Effect of restoration size on the clinical performance of posterior "packable" resin composites over 18 months.

Fifty predominantly moderate or large Class II or multiple-surface Class I resin composite restorations were placed in molars under rubber dam isolation. The restorative systems used were: Alert Condensable (Jeneric/Pentron) and SureFil (Dentsply/Caulk). The restorations were classified according to size, with 7 small, 25 moderate and 18 large, of which 8 were cusp replacement restorations. Baseline, 6, 12 and 18-month double-blinded clinical evaluations were carried out using modified USPHS criteria. The independent variables: restorative material, restoration size and three other clinical factors, were tested using a Multiple Logistic Regression procedure to determine if any were predictive of failure. Of the 50 restorations, four failed by the 18-month recall, three failed due to fracture of the restoration and one due to secondary caries. Both restorative systems demonstrated a 92% success rate. No association between restoration size (p = 0.99) or restorative material (p = 0.65) and failure was found. Similarly, the additional variables, occlusal contact type, presence of occlusal wear facets and first or second molar, were not predictive of failure.

Postoperative Sensitivity: A Comparison of Two Bonding Agents

Historically, postoperative pain associated with temperature was considered a thermal conduction problem. More recently, pulpal hydrodynamics has been used to explain this sensitivity. Relative to restorations placed with dentin bonding agents that require a separate etching step, agents that include an acidic primer are believed to result in a better seal of the dentinal tubules. This study compared pain associated with a standardized cold stimulus in two groups of restorations. One group was placed with a self-priming resin that required a separate etch step, the other with a self-etching, self-priming dentin bonding agent. This was a community-based, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Two hundred and nine restorations were placed for 76 participants. All teeth were asymptomatic at the start of the trial. Immediately following application of a standardized cold stimulus, participants rated the pain for each restored tooth using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). For each group of restorations, VAS scores at 13 weeks were compared to preoperative scores. In addition, the preoperative score was subtracted from the 13-week score, and the two groups of restorations were compared. For both groups of restorations, the median scores were significantly reduced at 13 weeks. This decrease in the VAS score reflects a reduction in sensitivity below that which existed preoperatively. There was no significant difference between the two groups of restorations in terms of change in sensitivity at 13 weeks.