Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry (대한치과보존학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Deep proximal margin rebuilding with direct esthetic restorations: a systematic review of marginal adaptation and bond strength

  • Hoda S. Ismail (Operative Dentistry Deparment, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University) ;
  • Ashraf I. Ali (Operative Dentistry Deparment, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University) ;
  • Rabab El. Mehesen (Operative Dentistry Deparment, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University) ;
  • Jelena Juloski (Clinic for Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Belgrade) ;
  • Franklin Garcia-Godoy (Department of Bioscience Research, College of Dentistry, University of Tennessee Health Science Center) ;
  • Salah H. Mahmoud (Operative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University)
  • Received : 2021.06.09
  • Accepted : 2021.08.08
  • Published : 2022.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This review aimed to characterize the effect of direct restorative material types and adhesive protocols on marginal adaptation and the bond strength of the interface between the material and the proximal dentin/cementum. An electronic search of 3 databases (the National Library of Medicine [MEDLINE/PubMed], Scopus, and ScienceDirect) was conducted. Studies were included if they evaluated marginal adaptation or bond strength tests for proximal restorations under the cementoenamel junction. Only 16 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. These studies presented a high degree of heterogeneity in terms of the materials used and the methodologies and evaluation criteria of each test; therefore, only a descriptive analysis could be conducted. The included studies were individually evaluated for the risk of bias following predetermined criteria. To summarize the results of the included studies, the type of restorative material affected the test results, whereas the use of different adhesive protocols had an insignificant effect on the results. It could be concluded that various categories of resin-based composites could be a suitable choice for clinicians to elevate proximal dentin/cementum margins, rather than the open sandwich technique with resin-modified glass ionomers. Despite challenges in bonding to proximal dentin/cementum margins, different adhesive protocols provided comparable outcomes.

Keywords

References

  1. Shenoy A. Is it the end of the road for dental amalgam? A critical review. J Conserv Dent 2008;11:99-107. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.45247
  2. Zhou X, Huang X, Li M, Peng X, Wang S, Zhou X, Cheng L. Development and status of resin composite as dental restorative materials. J Appl Polym Sci 2019;136:48180.
  3. Veneziani M. Adhesive restorations in the posterior area with subgingival cervical margins: new classification and differentiated treatment approach. Eur J Esthet Dent 2010;5:50-76.
  4. Cardoso MV, de Almeida Neves A, Mine A, Coutinho E, Van Landuyt K, De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B. Current aspects on bonding effectiveness and stability in adhesive dentistry. Aust Dent J 2011;56 Suppl 1:31-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2011.01294.x
  5. Manuja N, Nagpal R, Pandit IK. Dental adhesion: mechanism, techniques and durability. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2012;36:223-234.
  6. Kikushima D, Shimada Y, Foxton RM, Tagami J. Micro-shear bond strength of adhesive systems to cementum. Am J Dent 2005;18:364-368.
  7. Welbury RR, Murray JJ. A clinical trial of the glass-ionomer cement-composite resin "sandwich" technique in Class II cavities in permanent premolar and molar teeth. Quintessence Int 1990;21:507-512.
  8. Andersson-Wenckert IE, van Dijken JW, Horstedt P. Modified Class II open sandwich restorations: evaluation of interfacial adaptation and influence of different restorative techniques. Eur J Oral Sci 2002;110:270-275. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0447.2002.11210.x
  9. Kielbassa AM, Philipp F. Restoring proximal cavities of molars using the proximal box elevation technique: Systematic review and report of a case. Quintessence Int 2015;46:751-764.
  10. Andersson-Wenckert IE, van Dijken JW, Kieri C. Durability of extensive Class II open-sandwich restorations with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement after 6 years. Am J Dent 2004;17:43-50.
  11. Lindberg A, van Dijken JW, Lindberg M. 3-year evaluation of a new open sandwich technique in Class II cavities. Am J Dent 2003;16:33-36.
  12. Dietschi D, Spreafico R. Current clinical concepts for adhesive cementation of tooth-colored posterior restorations. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1998;10:47-54.
  13. Grubbs TD, Vargas M, Kolker J, Teixeira EC. Efficacy of direct restorative materials in proximal box elevation on the margin quality and fracture resistance of molars restored with CAD/CAM onlays. Oper Dent 2020;45:52-61.
  14. Vertolli TJ, Martinsen BD, Hanson CM, Howard RS, Kooistra S, Ye L. Effect of deep margin elevation on CAD/CAM-fabricated ceramic inlays. Oper Dent 2020;45:608-617. https://doi.org/10.2341/18-315-L
  15. Sarfati A, Tirlet G. Deep margin elevation versus crown lengthening: biologic width revisited. Int J Esthet Dent 2018;13:334-356.
  16. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LAPRISMA-P Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 2015;4:1.
  17. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DGPRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097.
  18. Rosa WL, Piva E, Silva AF. Bond strength of universal adhesives: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2015;43:765-776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2015.04.003
  19. Sarkis-Onofre R, Skupien JA, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, Pereira-Cenci T. The role of resin cement on bond strength of glass-fiber posts luted into root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies. Oper Dent 2014;39:E31-E44. https://doi.org/10.2341/13-070-LIT
  20. Aggarwal V, Bhasin SS. Application of calcium silicate materials after acid etching may preserve resindentin bonds. Oper Dent 2018;43:E243-E252. https://doi.org/10.2341/17-306-L
  21. Al-Harbi F, Kaisarly D, Bader D, El Gezawi M. marginal integrity of bulk versus incremental fill class II composite restorations. Oper Dent 2016;41:146-156. https://doi.org/10.2341/14-306-L
  22. Kumagai RY, Zeidan LC, Rodrigues JA, Reis AF, Roulet JF. Bond strength of a flowable bulk-fill resin composite in class II MOD cavities. J Adhes Dent 2015;17:427-432.
  23. Al-Harbi F, Kaisarly D, Michna A, ArRejaie A, Bader D, El Gezawi M. Cervical interfacial bonding effectiveness of class II bulk versus incremental fill resin composite restorations. Oper Dent 2015;40:622-635. https://doi.org/10.2341/14-152-L
  24. Aggarwal V, Singla M, Yadav S, Yadav H, Ragini . Marginal adaptation evaluation of biodentine and MTA plus in "Open Sandwich" class II restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2015;27:167-175. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12141
  25. Koyuturk AE, Tokay U, Sari ME, Ozmen B, Cortcu M, Acar H, Ulker M. Influence of the bulk fill restorative technique on microleakage and microtensile of class II restorations. Pediatr Dent J. 2014;24:148-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdj.2014.07.002
  26. Czarnecka B, Kruszelnicki A, Kao A, Strykowska M, Nicholson JW. Adhesion of resin-modified glass-ionomer cements may affect the integrity of tooth structure in the open sandwich technique. Dent Mater 2014;30:e301-e305.
  27. Campos EA, Ardu S, Lefever D, Jasse FF, Bortolotto T, Krejci I. Marginal adaptation of class II cavities restored with bulk-fill composites. J Dent 2014;42:575-581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.02.007
  28. Aggarwal V, Singla M, Yadav S, Yadav H. Effect of flowable composite liner and glass ionomer liner on class II gingival marginal adaptation of direct composite restorations with different bonding strategies. J Dent 2014;42:619-625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.02.016
  29. Zaruba M, Wegehaupt FJ, Attin T. Comparison between different flow application techniques: SDR vs flowable composite. J Adhes Dent 2013;15:115-121.
  30. de Mattos Pimenta Vidal C, Pavan S, Briso AL, Bedran-Russo AK. Effects of three restorative techniques in the bond strength and nanoleakage at gingival wall of Class II restorations subjected to simulated aging. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:627-633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0748-7
  31. Lefever D, Gregor L, Bortolotto T, Krejci I. Supragingival relocation of subgingivally located margins for adhesive inlays/onlays with different materials. J Adhes Dent 2012;14:561-567.
  32. Rodrigues Junior SA, Pin LF, Machado G, Della Bona A, Demarco FF. Influence of different restorative techniques on marginal seal of class II composite restorations. J Appl Oral Sci 2010;18:37-43. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572010000100008
  33. Garcia-Godoy F, Kramer N, Feilzer AJ, Frankenberger R. Long-term degradation of enamel and dentin bonds: 6-year results in vitro vs. in vivo. Dent Mater 2010;26:1113-1118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.07.012
  34. Fabianelli A, Sgarra A, Goracci C, Cantoro A, Pollington S, Ferrari M. Microleakage in class II restorations: open vs closed centripetal build-up technique. Oper Dent 2010;35:308-313. https://doi.org/10.2341/09-128-L
  35. Cavalcanti AN, Mitsui FH, Lima AF, Mathias P, Marchi GM. Evaluation of dentin hardness and bond strength at different walls of class II preparations. J Adhes Dent 2010;12:183-188.
  36. Bertoldi C, Monari E, Cortellini P, Generali L, Lucchi A, Spinato S, Zaffe D. Clinical and histological reaction of periodontal tissues to subgingival resin composite restorations. Clin Oral Investig 2020;24:1001-1011. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-02998-7
  37. Ferrari M, Koken S, Grandini S, Ferrari Cagidiaco E, Joda T, Discepoli N. Influence of cervical margin relocation (CMR) on periodontal health: 12-month results of a controlled trial. J Dent 2018;69:70-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2017.10.008
  38. Heintze SD. Systematic reviews: I. The correlation between laboratory tests on marginal quality and bond strength. II. The correlation between marginal quality and clinical outcome. J Adhes Dent 2007;9 Suppl 1:77-106.
  39. Francois P, Vennat E, Le Goff S, Ruscassier N, Attal JP, Dursun E. Shear bond strength and interface analysis between a resin composite and a recent high-viscous glass ionomer cement bonded with various adhesive systems. Clin Oral Investig 2019;23:2599-2608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2678-5
  40. Moazzami SM, Sarabi N, Hajizadeh H, Majidinia S, Li Y, Meharry MR, Shahrokh H. Efficacy of four lining materials in sandwich technique to reduce microleakage in class II composite resin restorations. Oper Dent 2014;39:256-263.
  41. Heintze S, Forjanic M, Cavalleri A. Microleakage of Class II restorations with different tracers--comparison with SEM quantitative analysis. J Adhes Dent 2008;10:259-267.
  42. De Goes MF, Giannini M, Di Hipolito V, Carrilho MR, Daronch M, Rueggeberg FA. Microtensile bond strength of adhesive systems to dentin with or without application of an intermediate flowable resin layer. Braz Dent J 2008;19:51-56. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-64402008000100009
  43. Baroudi K, Silikas N, Watts DC. Time-dependent visco-elastic creep and recovery of flowable composites. Eur J Oral Sci 2007;115:517-521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2007.00487.x
  44. Roggendorf MJ, Kramer N, Appelt A, Naumann M, Frankenberger R. Marginal quality of flowable 4-mm base vs. conventionally layered resin composite. J Dent 2011;39:643-647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2011.07.004
  45. El-Damanhoury H, Platt J. Polymerization shrinkage stress kinetics and related properties of bulk-fill resin composites. Oper Dent 2014;39:374-382. https://doi.org/10.2341/13-017-L
  46. Moorthy A, Hogg CH, Dowling AH, Grufferty BF, Benetti AR, Fleming GJ. Cuspal deflection and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with bulk-fill flowable resin-based composite base materials. J Dent 2012;40:500-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2012.02.015
  47. Benetti AR, Havndrup-Pedersen C, Honore D, Pedersen MK, Pallesen U. Bulk-fill resin composites: polymerization contraction, depth of cure, and gap formation. Oper Dent 2015;40:190-200. https://doi.org/10.2341/13-324-L
  48. Elkaffas AA, Hamama HHH, Mahmoud SH. Do universal adhesives promote bonding to dentin? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Restor Dent Endod 2018; 43:e29.
  49. Mahmoud SH, Al-Wakeel ES. Marginal adaptation of ormocer-, silorane-, and methacrylate-based composite restorative systems bonded to dentin cavities after water storage. Quintessence Int 2011;42:e131-e139.
  50. Moszner N, Salz U, Zimmermann J. Chemical aspects of self-etching enamel-dentin adhesives: a systematic review. Dent Mater 2005;21:895-910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2005.05.001
  51. Sattabanasuk V, Shimada Y, Tagami J. The bond of resin to different dentin surface characteristics. Oper Dent 2004;29:333-341.
  52. Cardoso PC, Lopes GC, Vieira LC, Baratieri LN. Effect of solvent type on microtensile bond strength of a total-etch one-bottle adhesive system to moist or dry dentin. Oper Dent 2005;30:376-381.
  53. Reis A, Loguercio AD. A 36-month clinical evaluation of ethanol/water and acetone-based etch-and-rinse adhesives in non-carious cervical lesions. Oper Dent 2009;34:384-391. https://doi.org/10.2341/08-117
  54. Bhadra D, Shah NC, Rao AS, Dedania MS, Bajpai N. A 1-year comparative evaluation of clinical performance of nanohybrid composite with Activa™ bioactive composite in Class II carious lesion: a randomized control study. J Conserv Dent 2019;22:92-96.
  55. Andre CB, Chan DC, Giannini M. Antibacterial-containing dental adhesives' effects on oral pathogens and on Streptococcus mutans biofilm: current perspectives. Am J Dent 2018;31:37B-41B.