Selective Enamel Etching in Self-etching Adhesives: a 2-year Clinical Trial
NCT ID: NCT02419157
Last Updated: 2015-04-17
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
25 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2012-10-31
2014-10-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Clinical Performance of Different Adhesive Strategies With a Universal System in Sclerosed Dentin in NCCL: A Double-blind Randomized Clinical Trial.
NCT05211908
Clinical Performance of Prime&Bond Active in Self-etch or Selective-etch Mode With or Without Bioglass
NCT03798184
Clinical Comparison of Universal Adhesives in Terms of Different Application Modes on the Restoration of NCCLs
NCT03415516
NCCL Direct Composite Restoration Performance With Self-Etch and Multimode Adhesives
NCT02698371
Clinical Trial of the Effect of Different Categories of Adhesive System
NCT02751970
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
CROSSOVER
TREATMENT
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Clearfil SE Bond Etch (CSE-E)
CSE-E (n=28): After shade selection, teeth were restored under relative isolation. Lesions were cleaned with pumice and water in a rubber cup followed by rinsing and drying. An enamel bevel of 1-2 mm was prepared with a diamond bur operated in a high-speed handpiece under air-water spray. Enamel margins were selectively etched with 36% phosphoric acid for 15s and subsequently thoroughly rinsed and air-dried. Adhesive system was applied according to manufacturers' instructions and light-cured with an LED for 10s. NCCLs were restored incrementally with a microhybrid composite resin. Increments were light cured for 20s. Afterwards, retraction cord was removed and finishing and polishing were performed with rubber points.
Selective enamel etching with 36% phosphoric acid
Selective enamel etching with 36% phosphoric acid
Etch: selective 36% phosphoric acid enamel etching
Clearfil SE Bond
Xeno V+ Etch (XV-E)
XV-E (n=28): After shade selection, teeth were restored under relative isolation. Lesions were cleaned with pumice and water in a rubber cup followed by rinsing and drying. An enamel bevel of 1-2 mm was prepared with a diamond bur operated in a high-speed handpiece under air-water spray. Enamel margins were selectively etched with 36% phosphoric acid for 15s and subsequently thoroughly rinsed and air-dried. Adhesive system was applied according to manufacturers' instructions and light-cured with an LED for 10s. NCCLs were restored incrementally with a microhybrid composite resin. Increments were light cured for 20s. Afterwards, retraction cord was removed and finishing and polishing were performed with rubber points.
Selective enamel etching with 36% phosphoric acid
Selective enamel etching with 36% phosphoric acid
Etch: selective 36% phosphoric acid enamel etching
Xeno V
Clearfil SE Bon Non-etch (CSE-NE)
CSE-NE (n=28): After shade selection, teeth were restored under relative isolation. Lesions were cleaned with pumice and water in a rubber cup followed by rinsing and drying. An enamel bevel of 1-2 mm was prepared with a diamond bur operated in a high-speed handpiece under air-water spray. Adhesive system was applied according to manufacturers' instructions and light-cured with an LED for 10s. NCCLs were restored incrementally with a microhybrid composite resin. Increments were light cured for 20s. Afterwards, retraction cord was removed and finishing and polishing were performed with rubber points.
No selective enamel etching with 36% phosphoric acid
No selective enamel etching with 36% phosphoric acid
Non-etch: without phosphoric acid selective enamel etching
Clearfil SE Bond
Xeno V+ Non-etch (XV-NE)
XV-NE (n=28): After shade selection, teeth were restored under relative isolation. Lesions were cleaned with pumice and water in a rubber cup followed by rinsing and drying. An enamel bevel of 1-2 mm was prepared with a diamond bur operated in a high-speed handpiece under air-water spray. Adhesive system was applied according to manufacturers' instructions and light-cured with an LED for 10s. NCCLs were restored incrementally with a microhybrid composite resin. Increments were light cured for 20s. Afterwards, retraction cord was removed and finishing and polishing were performed with rubber points.
No selective enamel etching with 36% phosphoric acid
No selective enamel etching with 36% phosphoric acid
Non-etch: without phosphoric acid selective enamel etching
Xeno V
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Selective enamel etching with 36% phosphoric acid
Etch: selective 36% phosphoric acid enamel etching
No selective enamel etching with 36% phosphoric acid
Non-etch: without phosphoric acid selective enamel etching
Clearfil SE Bond
Xeno V
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Present at least 4 NCCLs in vital teeth with margins in enamel and dentin (and its largest area in dentin), independently of teeth location;
* Non-smoking;
* Read and sign the Statement of Informed Consent.
Exclusion Criteria
* Severe or chronic periodontitis;
* Extreme caries sensitivity;
* Heavy bruxism;
* Under orthodontic treatment;
* Poor oral hygiene;
* Smokers.
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Guarulhos
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Caroline Ely
Associate Faculty
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
André F Reis
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Guarulhos
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Van Meerbeek B. A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results. J Dent Res. 2005 Feb;84(2):118-32. doi: 10.1177/154405910508400204.
De Munck J, Vargas M, Iracki J, Van Landuyt K, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. One-day bonding effectiveness of new self-etch adhesives to bur-cut enamel and dentin. Oper Dent. 2005 Jan-Feb;30(1):39-49.
Perdigao J, Geraldeli S. Bonding characteristics of self-etching adhesives to intact versus prepared enamel. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2003;15(1):32-41; discussion 42. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2003.tb00280.x.
Peumans M, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Five-year clinical effectiveness of a two-step self-etching adhesive. J Adhes Dent. 2007 Feb;9(1):7-10.
Van Meerbeek B, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Peumans M. A randomized controlled study evaluating the effectiveness of a two-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective phosphoric-acid etching of enamel. Dent Mater. 2005 Apr;21(4):375-83. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2004.05.008.
Reis AF, Bedran-Russo AK, Giannini M, Pereira PN. Interfacial ultramorphology of single-step adhesives: nanoleakage as a function of time. J Oral Rehabil. 2007 Mar;34(3):213-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01656.x.
Cvar JF, Ryge G. Reprint of criteria for the clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials. 1971. Clin Oral Investig. 2005 Dec;9(4):215-32. doi: 10.1007/s00784-005-0018-z. No abstract available.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
PRGRE 2015
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.