Home Current issue Ahead of print Search About us Editorial board Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 46
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
REVIEW ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 13  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 65-70

The clinical effectiveness of adhesive agents in posterior restorations: Which adhesive strategy performs better?


1 Departments of Conservative Dentistry, Arab American University, Jenin, Palestine
2 Departments of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Arab American University, Jenin, Palestine

Correspondence Address:
Naji Ziad Arandi
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Arab American University, P.O Box: 240 Jenin, 13 Zababdeh, Jenin
Palestine
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jorr.jorr_25_20

Rights and Permissions

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.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed118    
    Printed6    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded16    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal