Article ID: JPR_D_21_00279
Purpose: The efficacy of etch-and-rinse, selective enamel-etching, and self-etching protocols for universal adhesives in follow-ups of over 12 months was compared in a network meta-analysis.
Study selection: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 1998 to 2022 that compared marginal staining, marginal adaptation, retention and fractures, post-operative sensitivity, or recurrence of caries that took place over 12-months post-restoration were selected. A network meta-analysis determined the performance of each adhesive protocol.
Results: After screening 981 articles, 16 RCTs were subjected to data extraction. Of which, 674 patients with 2816 restorations, were included in the network meta-analysis. The pooled risk of marginal discoloration following self-etching was significantly higher than that following etch-and-rinse at over 12, 24, and 36 months, which was time-dependent. The pooled risks of unfavorable marginal adaptation and unfavorable retention and fractures following self-etching were also significantly higher than that following etch-and-rinse, with the rates of unfavorable retention and fractures in non-carious cervical lesions increasing in a time-dependent manner. The pooled risks of marginal discoloration, unfavorable marginal adaptation, retention and fractures were similar between etch-and-rinse and selective enamel-etching protocols. Post-operative hypersensitivity and recurrence of caries were not significantly different among etch-and-rinse, selective enamel-etching, and self-etching protocols.
Conclusions: In follow-ups over 12 months, esthetic and functional outcomes of restorations completed with an etch-and-rinse adhesive protocol were superior to the ones achieved with a self-etching strategy without selective enamel-etching. Selective enamel etching is recommended for self-etching systems. Biological responses were similar for all three adhesive strategies.
