Purpose: To evaluate the 24-month clinical performance of a “no wait” universal adhesive with different application modes in comparison with an etch-and-rinsew and two-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs).
Keywords: universal adhesive, non-carious cervical lesions, self-etch, etch-and-rinse.
Materials and Methods: A total of 234 non-carious cervical lesions in 34 patients were restored following 5 different adhesive approaches: 1. Clearfil Universal Bond Quick, self-etch mode (CUQ-SE); 2. Clearfil Universal Bond Quick, selective etch mode (CUQ-SLE); 3. Clearfil Universal Bond Quick, etch-and-rinse mode (CUQ-ER); 4. Clearfil SE Bond (self-etch adhesive) (CSEB); 5. Tetric N-Bond Universal, etch-and-rinse mode (TBU-ER). All NCCLs were restored with a nanohybrid composite (Tetric N-Ceram). The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, and 24months of clinical service regarding retention, marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, secondary caries, post-operative sensitivity, color match, surface texture using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria.
Results: The patient recall rate at 24 months was 73.5%. Eleven restorations, 6 of the CUQ-SE group, 4 of the CSEB group and 1 of the TBU-ER group, were clinically unacceptable due to retention loss. Regarding marginal adaptation and discoloration, CUQ-SE and CSEB groups exhibited higher bravo scores than other groups after 24 months (p < 0.05). At the end of 24-month examinations, no significant differences were detected among the groups regarding secondary caries, post-operative sensitivity, color match and surface texture.
Conclusion: The clinical survival rates of the “no wait” universal adhesive at self-etch mode after 24 months were not acceptable. The “no wait” universal adhesive showed clinically acceptable performance in selective-etch and etch-and-rinse mode according to the evaluated USPHS criteria.