IADR location:Goteborg, Sweden date:25-28 june 2003
Objectives: The purpose of this double-blind, split-mouth, randomized controlled clinical trial was to compare the bonding effectiveness of 2 three-step total-etch adhesives along with composites with contrasting stiffness. Methods: 74 patients randomly received two restorations out of 3 experimental groups: (1) Optibond FL with Prodigy (OFL-P; E-mod.=13.9 GPa; Kerr), (2) Permaquik with Amelogen Microfill (PMQ-M; E-mod.= 6.9 GPa; Ultradent), or (3) Permaquik with Amelogen Hybrid (PMQ-H, E-mod.= 14.7 GPa; Ultradent). The clinical effectiveness was recorded in terms of retention (R), perfect marginal integrity (MI), absence of clinical microleakage (CM) and absence of caries recurrence (CR) after 5 years of clinical service.
Results: The recall rate at 5 years was 85%. No significant difference between the 3 experimental groups was found for all parameters analyzed (McNemar, p>0.5). Therefore, we rejected the hypothesis that a microfilled composite with intrinsic higher elasticity withstands better tooth-flexure stresses than a hybrid composite, at least up to 5 years. Other plausible explanations for the excellent clinical performance might be related to the use of particle-filled adhesive resins. Both OptiBond FL and Permaquik result in relatively thick adhesive layers that thanks to a shock-absorbing effect may have partly compensated for shrinkage stress imposed during polymerization and later for other stress sources imposed during functioning. Conclusion: Both three-step total-etch adhesives provided excellent medium-term clinical effectiveness irrespective of the stiffness of the composite used. firstname.lastname@example.org