Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35477817›Full record

Trial reportClinical oral investigations2022

Sixty-month follow up of three different universal adhesives used with a highly-filled flowable resin composite in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesion.

Fatma Dilsad Oz, Canan Ozturk, Reza Soleimani, Sevil Gurgan

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03415412 (Clinical Evaluation of Three Different Universal Adhesives and a Universal Flowable Composite for Restoration of Non-carious Cervical Lesions), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03415412 naactive not recruitingnot on this map

Clinical Evaluation of Three Different Universal Adhesives and a Universal Flowable Composite for Restoration of Non-carious Cervical Lesions

TypeinterventionalSponsorHacettepe UniversityRan2016 to 2026Enrolled18ConditionsTooth DiseasesArmsClearfil Univesal Bond, IBond Universal, G-Premio Bond
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Fatma Dilsad OzDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Sihhiye, 06100, Ankara, Turkey. dilsadoz@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7450-723X
Canan OzturkManisa Dental Hospital, Manisa, Turkey.
Reza Soleimani, Teheran, Iran.
Sevil GurganDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Sihhiye, 06100, Ankara, Turkey.
Hacettepe University · TRPNPE Company (Iran) · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of this clinical trial was to evaluate and compare the performances of three different universal adhesives used with a highly filled flowable universal resin composite in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) over a 60-month period. MATERIAL AND

methodsNinety-nine NCCLs were restored at 18 participants. NCCLs were divided into three different universal adhesive groups: Clearfil Universal Bond (CU) (n = 31), iBOND Universal (IU) (n = 33), and G-Premio Bond (GP) (n = 35). Prior to the adhesive procedures, selective enamel etching was performed with 37% phosphoric acid in all experimental groups. Adhesive systems were applied following the manufacturers' instructions, and the lesions were restored with a highly filled flowable resin composite (G-ænial Universal Flo). Restorations were finished and polished immediately after placement. All restorations were scored with regard to retention, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, sensitivity, surface texture, and color match using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria after 1 week (baseline) and 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, and 60 months. Statistical analyses were performed using chi-square and McNemar's and Kaplan Meier tests. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05.

resultsAfter 60 months, the recall rate was 72.2%. Survival rates of CU, IU, and GP restorations were 87%, 85.2%, and 96.5%, respectively. Five CU (25%), 8 IU (34.8%), and 12 GP (42.9%) restorations exhibit bravo scores for marginal adaptation. However, no differences were seen among them. CU showed lower bravo score than IU and GP for marginal discoloration (CU, 0%; IU, 26.1%; GP, 32.1%). Two CU, 7 IU, and 6 GP restorations showed bravo scores for surface texture, and 2 (9.1%) CU and 1 (3.3%) GP restorations were scored as bravo score for color match (p > 0.05).

conclusionThe tested universal adhesives showed similar success rates during the 60-month follow-up. However, CU showed better clinical performance than IU and GP in terms of marginal adaptation and discoloration.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03415412 CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The long-term clinical performances of the three universal adhesives in the restoration of NCCLs using selective enamel etching mode were successful after 60 months.

Indexed as

Dental Restoration, PermanentTooth CervixComposite ResinsDental CementsDental Marginal AdaptationDental Restoration FailureDentin-Bonding AgentsFollow-Up StudiesHumansResin CementsComposite ResinsDental CementsDentin-Bonding AgentsResin CementsNon-carious cervical lesionSelective enamel etchingUniversal adhesive

Identifiers

PMID35477817
PMCPMC9045793
OpenAlexW4224990245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.