Trial reportJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2025
A randomized prospective clinical study evaluating the effectiveness of the Beautibond Xtreme adhesive system using different bonding techniques in class I and II restorations: one-year results.
Trial report in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis randomized, parallel-group clinical trial aimed to evaluate the one-year clinical performance of the Beautibond Xtreme adhesive system (Shofu Inc., Kyoto, Japan) applied with different bonding strategies in Class I and Class II posterior restorations. METHODOLOGY: A total of 22 patients (14 female and 8 male, aged ≥18 years) requiring restorative treatment provided 152 teeth with Class I or Class II carious lesions or defective restorations. Restorations were randomly assigned to six groups, including two control groups (Class I and II using the total-etch technique) and four test groups (Class I and II using either the self-etch technique or selective enamel etching). All restorations were performed using Beautibond Xtreme adhesive combined with Beautifill LS composite resin. Clinical performance was assessed at baseline, six months, and one year using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria, including anatomic form, marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, color match, surface texture, secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity, and retention. Randomization was performed with a computer-generated sequence, and two calibrated, blinded examiners (Kappa = 0.84) conducted all evaluations.
resultsNo significant changes were observed in anatomic form, color match, surface texture, secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity, or retention over time in any group (p>0.05). However, restorations performed using the self-etch technique showed significant deterioration in marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration from baseline to six months and one year (p<0.05). Significant differences were also observed when comparing these restorations to the total-etch and selective enamel etching groups (p<0.05).
conclusionThe Beautibond Xtreme adhesive system demonstrated better clinical performance when applied with total-etch or selective enamel etching techniques compared to the self-etch mode for both Class I and Class II restorations after one year of follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.