This clinical trial compares the performance of a new adhesive in composite restorations, suggesting effectiveness in dental practices.
This prospective, randomized, post-market, paired-comparison controlled trial compared the 2-year clinical performance of a new universal adhesive, Scotchbond Universal Plus Adhesive (SBU+), with that of Scotchbond Universal Adhesive (SBU). Both were applied as self-etch (SE) adhesives for composite resin restoration of Class I and Class II preparations. Two posterior teeth in each of 51 subjects were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a restoration with SBU + or to a restoration with SBU (control) applied with the SE strategy. Class I and/or Class II preparations were restored with Filtek Universal Restorative. Two calibrated and blinded examiners evaluated the restorations at baseline, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years, using the modified FDI criteria. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the outcomes. At the 2-year evaluation, retention was 100% for both the SBU + and SBU groups. Regarding fracture and retention, 36 of the 37 SBU+ restorations (97%) were graded “Clinically Excellent/Very Good,” while 1/37 (3%) was graded “Clinically Satisfactory.” All 38 SBU restorations (100%) were graded “Clinically Excellent/Very Good”. Marginal adaptation was clinically acceptable for all restorations at 2 years, with no statistically significant difference between the two adhesive materials. Furthermore, no recurrent caries lesions were observed at 2 years, and no restorations received a “Clinically Insufficient/Unsatisfactory” or “Clinically Poor” grade for any FDI criteria during any evaluation visit. At 2 years, SBU+ exhibited clinical efficacy similar to its predecessor, SBU, in Class I and Class II restorations in adult patients when using the self-etch (SE) technique. Mildly acidic universal dental adhesives may be used for posterior composite restorations without prior phosphoric acid etching.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Perdigão et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: