A 36-month evaluation of self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesives in noncarious cervical lesions.

Background: There are two bonding strategies for composite restorations: the etch-and-rinse (ER) approach and the self-etch (SE) approach. Few clinical trials have evaluated the SE approach in Class V restorations for a 36-month period. The authors conducted a study to evaluate whether the SE system can provide retention rates and marginal discoloration similar to that of the ER system.

Methods: Twenty-five patients, each having at least two pairs of equivalent noncarious cervical lesions under occlusion, were enrolled in this study. Two calibrated operators placed 78 restorations, one-half for ER and one-half for SE. Two independent examiners evaluated the restorations at baseline and after six-, 12-, 18- and 36-month periods according to the slightly modified U.S. Public Health Service criteria. Statistical analysis between materials in each period was conducted using a Fisher exact test (alpha = .05), and the performance of the materials at baseline in comparison with each period was evaluated by a McNemar test (alpha = .05).

Results: Five SE restorations and one ER restoration were lost after 36 months. After 36 months, 10 SE and five ER restorations were rated Bravo in marginal adaptation (P > .05). Fourteen SE and five ER restorations were rated Bravo in marginal discoloration (P < .05).

Conclusions: Although a significantly increased marginal discoloration was observed with SE, both adhesives showed retention rates in noncarious cervical lesions that were not statistically different after 36 months.

Clinical Implications: The ER and SE adhesive systems can be used with confidence; however, SE adhesive showed a faster and more progressive enamel marginal degradation.