| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 319.03 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Abstract(s)
Introdução: Este estudo tem por propósito, comparar o desempenho clínico das
diversas metodologias propostas para uma melhor retenção das restaurações com
resinas compostas utilizadas nas lesões cervicais não cariosas (LCNC), através de
uma revisão sistemática. O estudo utilizou como comparação, 7 critérios de
avaliação do USPHS que são convergentes nos estudos.
Materiais e Métodos: A revisão sistemática baseouse nas guidelines PRISMA. A
pesquisa foi realizada na PubMed/MEDLINE®, Bvsalud® e Cochrane®, com estudos
de 2011 até 2021. Tendo em consideração a questão PICO: ”Qual o tratamento de
superfície com melhor evidência na performance clínica das restaurações cervicais
não cariosas “, junto aos critérios de inclusão e exclusão. Foram avaliados os
conteúdos dos artigos selecionados após a leitura do título e do resumo, e em
seguida foram elegíveis os estudos pertinentes ao assunto.
Resultados: Com a pesquisa nas bases de dados foram identificados 354 estudos.
Após a exclusão dos duplicados, foram lidos os títulos de 111 artigos e foram
selecionados 71 estudos para ler os resumos, e então 40 estudos para leitura na
íntegra, a fim de avaliar a elegibilidade. Foram incluídos 13 estudos na análise
qualitativa.
Conclusão: Segundo os artigos selecionados a criação de bisel e de asperização
não parecem melhorar a retenção das restaurações com resina composta. A
utilização do ácido fosfórico 37% mostrou uma melhoria na retenção, bem como a
utilização do sistema etchandrinse mostra resultado melhor que o selfetch. Na
utilização do sistema selfetch parece necessitar de mais estudos, pois os autores
mostram forte tendência à sua utilização. Na questão dos adesivos, é visto uma
utilização massiva de adesivos universais em diversas formas de aplicação e tendo
resultados positivos.
Introduction: This study aims to compare the clinical performance of the different methodologies proposed for a better retention of composite resin restorations used in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCL´s) through a systematic review. The study used, as a comparison, 7 USPHS evaluation criteria that are convergent in the studies. Materials and Methods: The systematic review was based on the PRISMA guidelines. The research was carried out in PubMed/MEDLINE®, Bvsalud® and Cochrane ®, with studies from 2011 to 2021. Considering the PICO question:” Which surface treatment has the best evidence in the clinical performance of noncarious cervical restorations”, together with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The contents of the selected articles were evaluated after reading the title and abstract, and then the studies relevant to the subject were eligible. Results: With the search in the databases, 354 studies were identified. After excluding the duplicates, the titles of 111 articles were read and 71 were selected to read in the abstracts and then 40 in full, in order to assess eligibility. Thirteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis. Conclusion: According to the selected articles, the creation of bevel and roughness does not seem to improve the retention of composite resin restorations. The use of 37% phosphoric acid showed an improvement in retention, as well as the use of the etchandrinse system showed better results than the selfetch. The use of the selfetch system seems to need further studies, as the authors show a strong tendency to use it. In the matter of adhesives, a massive use of universal adhesives in various forms of application is seen, with positive results.
Introduction: This study aims to compare the clinical performance of the different methodologies proposed for a better retention of composite resin restorations used in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCL´s) through a systematic review. The study used, as a comparison, 7 USPHS evaluation criteria that are convergent in the studies. Materials and Methods: The systematic review was based on the PRISMA guidelines. The research was carried out in PubMed/MEDLINE®, Bvsalud® and Cochrane ®, with studies from 2011 to 2021. Considering the PICO question:” Which surface treatment has the best evidence in the clinical performance of noncarious cervical restorations”, together with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The contents of the selected articles were evaluated after reading the title and abstract, and then the studies relevant to the subject were eligible. Results: With the search in the databases, 354 studies were identified. After excluding the duplicates, the titles of 111 articles were read and 71 were selected to read in the abstracts and then 40 in full, in order to assess eligibility. Thirteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis. Conclusion: According to the selected articles, the creation of bevel and roughness does not seem to improve the retention of composite resin restorations. The use of 37% phosphoric acid showed an improvement in retention, as well as the use of the etchandrinse system showed better results than the selfetch. The use of the selfetch system seems to need further studies, as the authors show a strong tendency to use it. In the matter of adhesives, a massive use of universal adhesives in various forms of application is seen, with positive results.
Description
Keywords
Lesão não cariosa NCCLs Lesão Não cariosa Cariosa Noncarious lesion Injury Noncarious Carious