Randomized controlled open laboratory study evaluates adhesive shear strength in composite restorations, suggesting universal adhesives may outperform 5th generation types.
BACKGROUND: The evaluation of the clinical effectiveness of the adhesive system solely based on the analysis of bond strengthtest data is insufficient, it is advisable to conduct a number of additional studies in the laboratory: loss of retention of restorationsafter thermal cycling, tests for the marginal adaptation of fillings in extracted teeth. AIM: To compare the adhesive shear strength of composite restoration with hard tooth tissues after thermal cycling using a universal adhesive system and a 5th generation adhesive system. METHODS: During this study, the adhesive shear strength was determined using a universal adhesive system and a 5thgeneration adhesive system. Laboratory tests were conducted on the basis of the Department of Propaedeutics of Dental Diseasesof the Medical Institute of the RUDN University named after Patrice Lumumba (Moscow) and OOO Tekhnodent (Belgorod). The study included the following stages: sample preparation, laboratory methods (thermal cycling of samples, checking the adhesivestrength of samples for shear), statistical data processing in the SPSS Statistics program. Teeth removed for periodontal indicationswithout carious lesions and large fillings were used to prepare the samples. The tests were carried out in complience with RussianGOST R 56924-2016 standerd "DENTISTRY. Polymer reducing materials". RESULTS: According to the results of the study, the adhesive shear strength in group 1 using a universal adhesive system was17.48±3.3 Mpa, which is 2.5 times higher than the requirements of the Russian GOST R 56924-2016 standard "DENTISTRY.Polymer reducing materials". In group 2 using the 5th generation adhesive system, the adhesive shear strength was 16.54±3.91Mpa, which is 2.4 times higher than the requirements of the Russian GOST R 56924-2016 standard "DENTISTRY. Polymerreducing materials". The shear adhesive strength in the group of samples using the universal adhesive system is 1.05 times higherthan in the group using the 5th generation adhesive system. The results between groups 1 and 2 were statistically significant atp0.05. CONCLUSION: The adhesive strength of the universal adhesive system exceeds the adhesive strength of the 5th generationadhesive system by 1.05 times and amounts to 17.48+3.3 (p0.05), which indicates the high efficiency of these systems in clinicaluse in the localization of defects in the cervical region.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ruda et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: