Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 9, 2026

Scanning Electron Microscopic Evaluation of Surface Defects of Remover Retreatment File After Single and Multiple Uses
Published on: October 11, 2024
Etch-and-rinse vs self-etch strategy of a universal adhesive in Class II bulk-fill restorations: A 96-month
Aybuke Uslu Tekce1, Zeynep Bilge Kutuk2, Ayse Ruya Yazici1
1Hacettepe University, School of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Sıhhıye, Ankara, 06230, Turkey.
Objective:
This randomized clinical trial investigated the 96-month clinical performance of a universal adhesive (Adhese Universal Vivapen, Ivoclar Vivadent) applied in etch-and-rinse (ER) and self-etch (SE) modes in Class II bulk-fill composite restorations.
Materials And Methods:
Thirty-five patients, each with at least two Class II carious lesions, were enrolled. Using a split-mouth design, cavities were randomly assigned to ER or SE adhesive application. All restorations were placed with a high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composite (Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill, Ivoclar Vivadent). In total, 84 restorations were evaluated at baseline and at 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84 and 96 months by two calibrated, blinded examiners according to modified USPHS criteria. Statistical analyses were performed with Chi-square, Friedman, Cochran's Q, and McNemar tests (α=0.05).
Results:
At 96 months, 74 restorations in 33 participants were examined. No loss of retention/fractures occurred. Seven restorations were replaced (six due to secondary caries-ER: 1, SE: 5 and one due to unacceptable marginal adaptation-SE), yielding crude cumulative replacement rates of 2.4 % (ER) and 14.3 % (SE). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed significantly higher survival for ER than SE (97.4 % vs 85.2 %, p = 0.049). Marginal discoloration was consistently higher with SE from 36 months onward (p < 0.05), whereas marginal adaptation showed no differences between groups at any recall. Other criteria were comparable, and no postoperative sensitivity was recorded.
Conclusions:
Despite a statistically higher incidence of marginal discoloration in the SE approach, both strategies demonstrated comparable long-term outcomes, with no retention loss after 96 months. The ER showed a higher cumulative survival. These findings confirm the clinical acceptability of universal adhesives in Class II bulk-fill composite restorations over extended service periods.
Clinical Significance:
Universal adhesives demonstrated durable adhesion and predictable performance in posterior bulk-fill restorations with both strategies, while the ER approach provided additional benefits in marginal discoloration and lower cumulative replacement needs over the long term.
More Related Videos
05:30Roughness Impact of Piezoelectric Dental Scaler on Two Distinct Flowable Composite Filling Materials
Published on: January 10, 2025
07:42Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Microcracking in Concrete
Curing Methods
Corrosion of Reinforcement
However, over time and under certain conditions like carbonation, chloride ingress, and cracking this protective state can be compromised. Steel has areas with...