File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions

TitleClinical evaluation of three adhesive systems for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions
Authors
KeywordsChemicals And Cas Registry Numbers
Issue Date2007
PublisherOperative Dentistry. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.jopdent.org
Citation
Operative Dentistry, 2007, v. 32 n. 1, p. 11-15 How to Cite?
AbstractThe use of adhesive materials to restore non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL) has become the standard practice. Until recently, the most reliable material for restoring NCCL is glass ionomer cement, but the esthetics can be problematic. This study compared the retention of a self-etching adhesive, Clearfil SE Bond, with Clearfil ST resin composite (SE), with the phosphoric acid-etch single bottle adhesive Single Bond with A110 resin composite (SB) and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement, Fujin LC, (FJ). Ninety-two restorations in 20 patients (mean age 61 years) were placed. The teeth were restored randomly and manufacturers' instructions were followed. Patients were recalled at 6 months, 1, 2 and 3 years and the restorations were evaluated for marginal staining. The restorations were photographed at baseline and at recall periods. At one year, 80 restorations were available for evaluation; at 2 years, 65 restorations were eval uated and at 3 years, 55 restorations were evaluated. The cumulative retention rates at 1 year, 2 years and 3 years, respectively, were SE: 97%, 93%, 90%; SB: 86%, 77%, 77%; FJ: 100%, 100%, 97%. At 3 years, RM-GIC performed the best, followed by Clearfil SE Bond/Clearfil ST. Single Bond/AHO's performance was significantly less than the other 2 materials (p=0.012).
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/90735
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.819
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.641
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBurrow, MFen_HK
dc.contributor.authorTyas, MJen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-17T10:07:31Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-17T10:07:31Z-
dc.date.issued2007en_HK
dc.identifier.citationOperative Dentistry, 2007, v. 32 n. 1, p. 11-15en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0361-7734en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/90735-
dc.description.abstractThe use of adhesive materials to restore non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL) has become the standard practice. Until recently, the most reliable material for restoring NCCL is glass ionomer cement, but the esthetics can be problematic. This study compared the retention of a self-etching adhesive, Clearfil SE Bond, with Clearfil ST resin composite (SE), with the phosphoric acid-etch single bottle adhesive Single Bond with A110 resin composite (SB) and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement, Fujin LC, (FJ). Ninety-two restorations in 20 patients (mean age 61 years) were placed. The teeth were restored randomly and manufacturers' instructions were followed. Patients were recalled at 6 months, 1, 2 and 3 years and the restorations were evaluated for marginal staining. The restorations were photographed at baseline and at recall periods. At one year, 80 restorations were available for evaluation; at 2 years, 65 restorations were eval uated and at 3 years, 55 restorations were evaluated. The cumulative retention rates at 1 year, 2 years and 3 years, respectively, were SE: 97%, 93%, 90%; SB: 86%, 77%, 77%; FJ: 100%, 100%, 97%. At 3 years, RM-GIC performed the best, followed by Clearfil SE Bond/Clearfil ST. Single Bond/AHO's performance was significantly less than the other 2 materials (p=0.012).en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherOperative Dentistry. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.jopdent.orgen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofOperative Dentistryen_HK
dc.subjectChemicals And Cas Registry Numbersen_HK
dc.subject.meshBisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshDental Materials - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshDental Prosthesis Retention - methodsen_HK
dc.subject.meshGlass Ionomer Cements - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshHumansen_HK
dc.subject.meshLongitudinal Studiesen_HK
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_HK
dc.subject.meshResin Cements - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshResins, Synthetic - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshTooth Cervixen_HK
dc.titleClinical evaluation of three adhesive systems for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesionsen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.emailBurrow, MF:mfburr58@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityBurrow, MF=rp01306en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.2341/06-50en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid17288323-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-33846696111en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-33846696111&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume32en_HK
dc.identifier.issue1en_HK
dc.identifier.spage11en_HK
dc.identifier.epage15en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000243757600003-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBurrow, MF=7005876730en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridTyas, MJ=7006088443en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats