粘接剂在后牙体修复中的临床效果:哪种粘接剂效果更好?

Naji Ziad Arandi, M. Thabet
{"title":"粘接剂在后牙体修复中的临床效果:哪种粘接剂效果更好?","authors":"Naji Ziad Arandi, M. Thabet","doi":"10.4103/jorr.jorr_25_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The clinical effectiveness of adhesive agents has been mainly evaluated using class V restorations. Clinical studies evaluating adhesives in combination with posterior composites are scarce and of short-term periods. This paper is aimed to review the current literature on the clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives when used to restore posterior teeth (Class I and Class II). To conduct this review, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases were used to search for peer-reviewed articles on the clinical performance of adhesive agents in posterior composite restorations. Search terms used included “adhesive agents,” “clinical evaluation,” “composite restorations,” “posterior teeth,” “self-etch adhesives,” “etch -and -rinse adhesives,” and “universal adhesives.” To enrich the results, reference mining of the articles that were identified was used to locate other papers. The process of cross-referencing continued until no new articles were identified. No limits were placed on the year of publication, but only articles in English were considered. The current review found that simplification in the adhesive technique so far seems to affect the clinical performance. There is a relative paucity of evidence relating to the performance of universal adhesive agents in posterior restorations. Further long-term clinical studies are needed to evaluate the clinical performance of adhesive agents.","PeriodicalId":31361,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral Research and Review","volume":"13 1","pages":"65 - 70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The clinical effectiveness of adhesive agents in posterior restorations: Which adhesive strategy performs better?\",\"authors\":\"Naji Ziad Arandi, M. Thabet\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jorr.jorr_25_20\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The clinical effectiveness of adhesive agents has been mainly evaluated using class V restorations. Clinical studies evaluating adhesives in combination with posterior composites are scarce and of short-term periods. This paper is aimed to review the current literature on the clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives when used to restore posterior teeth (Class I and Class II). To conduct this review, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases were used to search for peer-reviewed articles on the clinical performance of adhesive agents in posterior composite restorations. Search terms used included “adhesive agents,” “clinical evaluation,” “composite restorations,” “posterior teeth,” “self-etch adhesives,” “etch -and -rinse adhesives,” and “universal adhesives.” To enrich the results, reference mining of the articles that were identified was used to locate other papers. The process of cross-referencing continued until no new articles were identified. No limits were placed on the year of publication, but only articles in English were considered. The current review found that simplification in the adhesive technique so far seems to affect the clinical performance. There is a relative paucity of evidence relating to the performance of universal adhesive agents in posterior restorations. Further long-term clinical studies are needed to evaluate the clinical performance of adhesive agents.\",\"PeriodicalId\":31361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Oral Research and Review\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"65 - 70\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Oral Research and Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jorr.jorr_25_20\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oral Research and Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jorr.jorr_25_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

粘接剂的临床疗效评价主要采用V类修复体。评估粘接剂与后路复合材料联合的临床研究很少,而且是短期的。本文旨在回顾当代粘接剂用于修复后牙(I类和II类)的临床有效性的文献。为了进行这项综述,我们使用Scopus、PubMed和谷歌Scholar数据库搜索有关粘接剂在后牙复合修复体中的临床性能的同行评审文章。搜索词包括“粘合剂”、“临床评估”、“复合修复”、“后牙”、“自蚀刻粘合剂”、“蚀刻-冲洗粘合剂”和“通用粘合剂”。为了丰富结果,参考文献挖掘被识别的文章被用来定位其他论文。交叉参考的过程一直持续到没有发现新的文章为止。对出版年份没有限制,但只考虑英文文章。目前的回顾发现,迄今为止,粘接剂技术的简化似乎影响了临床表现。关于通用粘接剂在后牙体修复中的表现,证据相对缺乏。需要进一步的长期临床研究来评估粘接剂的临床性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The clinical effectiveness of adhesive agents in posterior restorations: Which adhesive strategy performs better?
The clinical effectiveness of adhesive agents has been mainly evaluated using class V restorations. Clinical studies evaluating adhesives in combination with posterior composites are scarce and of short-term periods. This paper is aimed to review the current literature on the clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives when used to restore posterior teeth (Class I and Class II). To conduct this review, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases were used to search for peer-reviewed articles on the clinical performance of adhesive agents in posterior composite restorations. Search terms used included “adhesive agents,” “clinical evaluation,” “composite restorations,” “posterior teeth,” “self-etch adhesives,” “etch -and -rinse adhesives,” and “universal adhesives.” To enrich the results, reference mining of the articles that were identified was used to locate other papers. The process of cross-referencing continued until no new articles were identified. No limits were placed on the year of publication, but only articles in English were considered. The current review found that simplification in the adhesive technique so far seems to affect the clinical performance. There is a relative paucity of evidence relating to the performance of universal adhesive agents in posterior restorations. Further long-term clinical studies are needed to evaluate the clinical performance of adhesive agents.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evolution of orthodontic aligners: A narrative review Anti-sclerostin antibody – A potential therapeutic target for periodontal bone regeneration Perception towards professionalism among Indian dental educators and residents – A descriptive study Magnum of magnet: Rehabilitation of surgical defect post rhinocerebral mucormycosis with hybrid prosthesis Pharyngeal width comparison in different skeletal malocclusions and growth patterns of Nepalese population
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1