Trial reportJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.]2026
6-Month Clinical Evaluation of Reduced Dentin Etching Time Using Universal Adhesives in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.], 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the effect of reduced dentin etching time on the clinical performance of two universal adhesive systems in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs).
methodsA total of 144 NCCLs restorations were randomly placed in 36 participants according to four experimental groups: SUP5 (Scotchbond Universal Plus adhesive [pH ≈2.5-2.7] applied on dentin etched for 5 s [experimental group]); SUP15 (SUP applied on dentin etched for 15 s [control group]); GBU5 (Gluma Bond Universal adhesive [pH ≈1.5-1.8] applied on dentin etched for 5 s [experimental group]); GBU15 (GBU applied on dentin etched for 15 s [control group]). Restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months, using the updated FDI criteria. Appropriate statistical analyses were performed (α = 0.05).
resultsThe recall rate was 100% at 6 months. Retention/material fracture rates were 97.2% (87.3-100) for SUP5 and SUP15, and 94.4% (83.1-100) for GBU5 and GBU15. No significant differences among the groups were observed for retention or material fracture. Two restorations showed minor marginal staining, two restorations showed minor postoperative (hyper-) sensitivity, and 25 restorations presented minimal marginal adaptation defects. No significant differences were observed among the groups for any secondary clinical parameters evaluated (p > 0.05).
conclusionReducing dentin etching time did not negatively affect the 6-month clinical performance of NCCLs resin restorations bonded with universal adhesives. Therefore, shorter dentin etching times represent a viable clinical approach in adhesive clinical procedures, reducing chair time. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Shortened dentin etching time does not compromise the short-term clinical performance of universal adhesive systems in NCCLs.
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.