Longevity of indirect restorations cemented with self-adhesive resin luting with and without selective enamel etching. A Systematic review and meta-analysis

Monique Solon-de-Mello; Tatiana Kelly da Silva Fidalgo; Aline Dos Santos Letieri; Daniele Masterson; José Mauro Granjeiro; Rafael V Monte Alto; Lucianne Cople Maia

doi:10.1111/jerd.12504

Longevity of indirect restorations cemented with self-adhesive resin luting with and without selective enamel etching. A Systematic review and meta-analysis

J Esthet Restor Dent. 2019 Jul;31(4):327-337. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12504. Epub 2019 Jun 17.

Authors

Monique Solon-de-Mello¹, Tatiana Kelly da Silva Fidalgo², Aline Dos Santos Letieri³, Daniele Masterson⁴, José Mauro Granjeiro⁵, Rafael V Monte Alto⁵, Lucianne Cople Maia⁶

Affiliations

¹ Post graduate program in Dentistry, Federal Fluminense University, Niterói, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
² Department of Preventive and Community Dentistry, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
³ Post graduate program in Pedriatric Dentistry, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
⁴ Center of Health Sciences, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
⁵ Department of Clinics, Federal Fluminense University, Niterói, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
⁶ Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

PMID: 31207007
DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12504

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the influence of the selective etching in the survival rates of indirect restorations cemented with self-adhesive resin luting.

Materials and methods: The eligibility criteria were formulated based on PICOS strategy. The search without restrictions was performed in PubMed/Medline, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS databases and gray literature until May 2018. Cochrane Collaboration's tool was performed for assessing the risk of bias. According to the bias risk analysis, the studies were classified as low risk of bias and high quality of evidence. The systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018091202). The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software (RevMan, Copenhagen, Denmark) and the risk ration and confidence interval was obtained (p < 0.05).

Results: After database screening, removal of duplicates and eligibility criteria application, two studies were selected for this systematic review, with 65 participants (34 in one and 31 in the other). The pooled meta-analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in clinical longevity for selective etching in indirect restorations (P > .05; I² = 0%) and risk ratio of 0.46 [0.19-1.09].

Conclusions: Based on the findings, the results of this systematic review suggest that the selective enamel etching prior to application of self-adhesive luting cements systems for indirect restoration do not influence the clinical longevity of indirect restorations.

Clinical significance: The knowledge of the clinical steps of adhesive procedures is fundamental to the success of adhesive restorations and their longevity. Self-adhesive resin cements simplify the luting procedure of indirect restorations. However, adding a step that could significantly improve long-term survival would be of great value. Thus, the results of this systematic review will provide data so that the decision making regarding materials used for adhesive cementation is conducted based on scientific evidence.

Keywords: indirect restorations; resin cementation; selective enamel etching; systematic review.

Publication types

Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Systematic Review

MeSH terms

Acid Etching, Dental*
Cementation
Composite Resins*
Dental Cements
Dental Enamel
Resin Cements

Substances

Composite Resins
Dental Cements
Resin Cements