Non-Cochrane · intervention · PM42042267
Comparison of Adhesive Strategies with Different Etching Approaches on the Clinical Performance of Restorations in Non-Carious Cervical Lesions: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Chaple Gil Alain Manuel, Pereda Vázquez Laura, Santiesteban Velázquez Meylin, et al. · Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026 · PubMed · doi:10.3390/jfb17040160
Findings
Population Patients with non-carious cervical lesions in permanent teeth restored with direct materials
59 findings
| SelE|2U|CR_NANO: selective enamel etch, 2-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.619 [0.059, 6.496] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SelE|2U|CR_NANO: selective enamel etch, 2-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.096 [0.012, 0.771] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SelE|1U|CR_NANO: selective enamel etch, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.232 [0.076, 0.707] High 1 study |
| SelE|1U|CR_NANO: selective enamel etch, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.600 [0.232, 1.551] Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness 1 study |
| EARm|1U|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse with moist dentin, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.750 [0.371, 1.513] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EARm|1U|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse with moist dentin, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.165 [0.056, 0.482] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EAR|2U|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse, 2-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.474 [0.138, 1.626] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EAR|2U|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse, 2-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.775 [0.330, 1.820] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EARd|1U|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse on dry dentin, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.073 [0.020, 0.270] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EARd|1U|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse on dry dentin, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.782 [0.356, 1.717] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SelEse|1U|CR_NANO: selective enamel etch with self-etch on dentin, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.261 [0.105, 0.646] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SelEse|1U|CR_NANO: selective enamel etch with self-etch on dentin, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.840 [0.479, 1.473] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|2NU|SIL: self-etch, 2-step non-universal adhesive, silorane composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.854 [0.224, 3.250] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|2NU|SIL: self-etch, 2-step non-universal adhesive, silorane composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.227 [0.021, 2.484] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EAR|1U|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.184 [0.073, 0.460] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EAR|1U|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.908 [0.527, 1.566] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SelEse|2NU|CR_CH: selective enamel etch with self-etch on dentin, 2-step non-universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 3.848 [0.773, 19.172] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SelEse|2NU|CR_CH: selective enamel etch with self-etch on dentin, 2-step non-universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.059 [0.287, 3.904] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EAR|2NU|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse, 2-step non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.607 [0.254, 1.450] Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness 1 study |
| EAR|2NU|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse, 2-step non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.111 [0.641, 1.927] High 1 study |
| EAR|3NU|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse, 3-step or more non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.011 [0.613, 1.666] Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness 1 study |
| EAR|3NU|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse, 3-step or more non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.132 [0.730, 1.753] High 1 study |
| SE|2NU|CR_CH: self-etch, 2-step non-universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.286 [0.354, 4.675] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|2NU|CR_CH: self-etch, 2-step non-universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 3.775 [1.596, 8.927] Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, indirectness 1 study |
| SelEse|1NU|CR_NANO: selective enamel etch with self-etch on dentin, 1-step non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.318 [0.651, 2.667] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SelEse|1NU|CR_NANO: selective enamel etch with self-etch on dentin, 1-step non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.349 [0.035, 3.433] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EAR|3NU|CR_CH: etch-and-rinse, 3-step or more non-universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.439 [0.656, 3.157] Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision 1 study |
| EAR|3NU|CR_CH: etch-and-rinse, 3-step or more non-universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.329 [0.433, 4.078] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|2NU|CR_NANO: self-etch, 2-step non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.368 [0.779, 2.402] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|2NU|CR_NANO: self-etch, 2-step non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.716 [0.328, 1.564] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|2U|CR_NANO: self-etch, 2-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.410 [0.056, 35.645] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|2U|CR_NANO: self-etch, 2-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.165 [0.308, 4.400] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EARhb|1U|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse with extra hydrophobic bonding resin, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.108 [0.005, 2.320] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EARhb|1U|CR_NANO: etch-and-rinse with extra hydrophobic bonding resin, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.468 [0.171, 12.605] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|1U|CR_NANO: self-etch, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.543 [0.231, 1.275] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|1U|CR_NANO: self-etch, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.476 [0.872, 2.498] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EAR|1U|CR_CH: etch-and-rinse, 1-step universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.600 [0.012, 29.116] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EAR|1U|CR_CH: etch-and-rinse, 1-step universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.519 [0.149, 15.507] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|1NU|CR_NANO: self-etch, 1-step non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.187 [0.484, 2.914] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|1NU|CR_NANO: self-etch, 1-step non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.641 [0.909, 2.960] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|1U|CR_CH: self-etch, 1-step universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 4.318 [0.162, 114.767] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|1U|CR_CH: self-etch, 1-step universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.659 [0.497, 5.546] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SelEse|2NU|CR_NANO: selective enamel etch with self-etch on dentin, 2-step non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.681 [0.232, 12.192] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SelEse|2NU|CR_NANO: selective enamel etch with self-etch on dentin, 2-step non-universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.424 [0.018, 9.809] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|1NU|CR_CH: self-etch, 1-step non-universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.774 [0.581, 5.421] Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision 1 study |
| SE|1NU|CR_CH: self-etch, 1-step non-universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.484 [0.765, 2.882] Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision 1 study |
| EAR|2U|CR_CH: etch-and-rinse, 2-step universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.793 [0.231, 2.717] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EAR|2U|CR_CH: etch-and-rinse, 2-step universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.892 [0.353, 10.139] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| EAR|2NU|CR_CH: etch-and-rinse, 2-step non-universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 4.535 [2.115, 9.722] High 3 studies |
| EAR|2NU|CR_CH: etch-and-rinse, 2-step non-universal adhesive, conventional/hybrid composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 2.057 [0.741, 5.709] Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness 3 studies |
| SEhb|1U|CR_NANO: self-etch with extra hydrophobic bonding resin, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 2.663 [0.320, 22.201] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SEhb|1U|CR_NANO: self-etch with extra hydrophobic bonding resin, 1-step universal adhesive, nanofilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.513 [0.066, 3.969] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|1U|CMP: self-etch, 1-step universal adhesive, compomer | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 3.000 [0.353, 25.460] High 1 study |
| SE|1U|CMP: self-etch, 1-step universal adhesive, compomer | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Marginal adaptation failure Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 4.136 [1.005, 17.027] High 1 study |
| EAR|2NU|CMP: etch-and-rinse, 2-step non-universal adhesive, compomer | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 0.382 [0.016, 9.375] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
| SE|2NU|CMP: self-etch, 2-step non-universal adhesive, compomer | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.589 [0.561, 4.497] Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness 1 study |
| SE|1NU|CMP: self-etch, 1-step non-universal adhesive, compomer | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 1.631 [0.577, 4.605] Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness 1 study |
| EAR|2NU|CR_MF: etch-and-rinse, 2-step non-universal adhesive, microfilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 2.380 [0.412, 13.757] Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision 1 study |
| SE|1NU|CR_MF: self-etch, 1-step non-universal adhesive, microfilled composite | RMGI: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (reference) | Retention loss Longest available follow-up · Clinical trials in dental clinics | RR 11.902 [1.026, 138.090] GRADE not reported Studies not reported |
Included primary studies 77
Open in Studies| Study | Year | Also included by | Outcomes it informs here | Trial data |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jassal 2018 Clinical Effectiveness of a Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement and a Mild One-step Self-etch Adhesive Applied Actively and Passively in… DOI:10.2341/17-147-c | 2018 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Onal 2005 The two-year clinical performance of esthetic restorative materials in noncarious cervical lesions DOI:10.14219/jada.archive.2005.0085 | 2005 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Perdigão 2012 Randomized Clinical Trial of Two Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Materials: 1-year Results DOI:10.2341/11-415-c | 2012 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Santiago 2010 Two-year clinical evaluation of resinous restorative systems in non-carious cervical lesions DOI:10.1590/s0103-64402010000300010 | 2010 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Vural 2020 Twenty-four-month clinical performance of a glass hybrid restorative in non-carious cervical lesions of patients with bruxism: a… DOI:10.1007/s00784-019-02986-x | 2019 | 1 other review | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Abdalla 2006 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Atalay 2020 Thirty-six-month clinical evaluation of different adhesive strategies of a universal adhesive DOI:10.1007/s00784-019-03052-2 | 2019 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Barceleiro 2022 Thirty-six-month follow-up of cervical composite restorations placed with an MDP-free universal adhesive system using different adhesive… DOI:10.1007/s00784-022-04397-x | 2022 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Bhat 2024 Evaluation of Efficacy of Self-etch Adhesives in the Restoration of Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A Controlled Clinical Trial DOI:10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2376 | 2024 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Boushell 2016 Six-year clinical performance of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2016.06.003 | 2016 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Brackett 2003 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Brackett 2005 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Burgess 2013 Clinical Evaluation of Self-etch and Total-etch Adhesive Systems in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A Two-year Report DOI:10.2341/12-355-cr | 2013 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Burrow 2007 Clinical Evaluation of Three Adhesive Systems for the Restoration of Non-carious Cervical Lesions DOI:10.2341/06-50 | 2007 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Çelik 2015 DOI:10.3290/j.jad.a34556 | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Cruz 2021 DOI:10.3290/j.jad.b2000173 | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Dalton 2005 An 18-months' evaluation of self-etch and etch & rinse adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions DOI:10.1080/00016350510019874 | 2005 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| de Albuquerque 2020 A New Dual-cure Universal Simplified Adhesive: 18-month Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial DOI:10.2341/19-144-c | 2020 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| de Albuquerque 2022 Universal Simplified Adhesive applied under different bonding technique's: 36-month Randomized Multicentre Clinical Trial DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104120 | 2022 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| de Almeida 2023 Eighteen-month clinical evaluation of a new universal adhesive applied in the “no-waiting” technique: a randomized clinical trial DOI:10.1007/s00784-022-04703-7 | 2022 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| de Almeida 2026 Thirty-six months of clinical evaluation of a new universal adhesive applied in the “no waiting” technique: A randomized clinical trial DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2025.106222 | 2026 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| de Carvalho 2015 DOI:10.3290/j.jad.a35009 | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| de Paris 2020 Five-year clinical evaluation of a universal adhesive: A randomized double-blind trial DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2020.08.007 | 2020 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Digole 2020 Comparative evaluation of clinical performance of two self-etch adhesive systems with total-etch adhesive system in noncarious cervical… PMID:33384494 | 2020 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Dutra-Correa 2019 Randomized clinical trial of four adhesion strategies: A 42 month study DOI:10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_466_16 | 2019 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ermis 2012 Clinical effectiveness of a one-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions at 2 years DOI:10.1007/s00784-011-0565-4 | 2011 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ermis 2012 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Follak 2021 Clinical behavior of universal adhesives in non-carious cervical lesions: A randomized clinical trial DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103747 | 2021 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Franco 2006 5-year Clinical Performance of Resin Composite Versus Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Restorative System in Non-carious Cervical Lesions DOI:10.2341/05-87 | 2006 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Fron 2011 Effectiveness of a new one-step self-etch adhesive in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: 2-Year results of a randomized… DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2010.11.006 | 2011 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Fuentes 2023 Effect of an additional bonding resin on the 5-year performance of a universal adhesive: a randomized clinical trial DOI:10.1007/s00784-022-04613-8 | 2022 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Gallo 2005 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Haak 2019 Clinical and OCT outcomes of a universal adhesive in a randomized clinical trial after 12 months DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2019.103200 | 2019 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Haak 2022 Clinical Outcomes and Quantitative Margin Analysis of a Universal Adhesive Using a Randomized Clinical Trial over Three Years DOI:10.3390/jcm11236910 | 2022 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Häfer 2015 A three-year clinical evaluation of a one-step self-etch and a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2014.12.009 | 2015 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Kemaloğlu 2020 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Kubo 2006 Five-year clinical evaluation of two adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2005.04.003 | 2006 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Lawson 2015 Two-year clinical trial of a universal adhesive in total-etch and self-etch mode in non-carious cervical lesions DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2015.07.009 | 2015 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Loguercio 2003 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Loguercio 2007 A 36-month evaluation of self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesives in noncarious cervical lesions DOI:10.14219/jada.archive.2007.0204 | 2007 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Loguercio 2008 Application of a Dental Adhesive Using the Self-Etch and Etch-and-Rinse Approaches DOI:10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0021 | 2008 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Loguercio 2015 A new universal simplified adhesive: 36-Month randomized double-blind clinical trial DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2015.07.005 | 2015 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Lopes 2016 Six-month Follow-up of Cervical Composite Restorations Placed With a New Universal Adhesive System: A Randomized Clinical Trial DOI:10.2341/15-309-c | 2016 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Manarte-Monteiro 2022 Universal Adhesives and Adhesion Modes in Non-Carious Cervical Restorations: 2-Year Randomised Clinical Trial. PMID:35012056 | 2021 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Merle 2022 Clinical and OCT assessment of application modes of a universal adhesive in a 12-month RCT DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104068 | 2022 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Moosavi 2013 The Clinical Effectiveness of Various Adhesive Systems: An 18-Month Evaluation DOI:10.2341/12-110-cr | 2013 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ñaupari-Villasante 2023 Five-year clinical evaluation of universal adhesive applied following different bonding techniques: A randomized multicenter clinical trial DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2023.04.007 | 2023 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ñaupari-Villasante 2025 Longevity of a single-dose, dual-cure universal adhesive: A 7.5-year double-blind split-mouth two-center randomized trial DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2025.11.015 | 2026 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Oz 2019 Twenty-four-month clinical performance of different universal adhesives in etch-and-rinse, selective etching and self-etch application… DOI:10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0358 | 2019 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Oz 2022 DOI:10.3290/j.jad.b3240675 | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ozel 2010 One‐year clinical evaluation of a two‐step self‐etch adhesive with and without additional enamel etching technique in cervical lesions DOI:10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01218.x | 2010 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Pappa 2024 A 2-Year Randomized Clinical Trial of Three Bonding Techniques in Non-Carious Cervical Lesions. PMID:38929622 | 2024 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Pena 2016 Two-year Randomized Clinical Trial of Self-etching Adhesives and Selective Enamel Etching DOI:10.2341/15-130-c | 2016 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Perdigão 2005 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Perdigão 2012 Randomized Clinical Trial of Four Adhesion Strategies: 18-Month Results DOI:10.2341/11-222-c | 2012 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Perdigão 2014 A New Universal Simplified Adhesive: 18-Month Clinical Evaluation DOI:10.2341/13-045-c | 2014 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Perdigão 2020 Effect of a hydrophobic bonding resin on the 36-month performance of a universal adhesive—a randomized clinical trial DOI:10.1007/s00784-019-02940-x | 2019 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Perdigão 2020 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Peumans 2005 Three‐year clinical effectiveness of a two‐step self‐etch adhesive in cervical lesions DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0722.2005.00256.x | 2005 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Peumans 2010 Eight-year clinical evaluation of a 2-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective enamel etching DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2010.08.190 | 2010 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Peumans 2015 Thirteen-year randomized controlled clinical trial of a two-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2015.01.005 | 2015 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Peumans 2018 DOI:10.3290/j.jad.a40630 | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Peumans 2021 DOI:10.3290/j.jad.b1367831 | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Peumans 2023 DOI:10.3290/j.jad.b4186751 | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ranjitha 2020 Clinical efficacy of universal adhesives for the restoration of noncarious cervical lesions: A randomized clinical trial. PMID:33551590 | 2020 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ruschel 2018 Eighteen-month Clinical Study of Universal Adhesives in Noncarious Cervical Lesions DOI:10.2341/16-320-c | 2018 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ruschel 2019 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Ruschel 2023 Five-year Clinical Evaluation of Universal Adhesives in Noncarious Cervical Lesions DOI:10.2341/21-132-c | 2023 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Schwendicke 2021 Glass hybrid versus composite for non-carious cervical lesions: Survival, restoration quality and costs in randomized controlled trial… DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103689 | 2021 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Schwendicke 2021 An Updated Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis Of Randomized Trials On Topical Cyclosporin A For Dry-Eye Disease. PMID:32021110 | 2020 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Tian 2014 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Tuncer 2013 Clinical evaluation of different adhesives used in the restoration of non‐carious cervical lesions: 24‐month results DOI:10.1111/adj.12028 | 2013 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| van Dijken 2013 A randomized controlled 5-year prospective study of two HEMA-free adhesives, a 1-step self etching and a 3-step etch-and-rinse, in… DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2013.08.203 | 2013 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Van Landuyt 2011 Three-year clinical performance of a HEMA-free one-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0722.2011.00855.x | 2011 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| van Meerbeek 2005 A randomized controlled study evaluating the effectiveness of a two-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective phosphoric-acid… DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2004.05.008 | 2005 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Yaman 2014 Three-year randomized clinical evaluation of a low-shrinkage silorane-based resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions DOI:10.1007/s00784-013-1079-z | 2013 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Zanatta 2019 Bonding Performance of Simplified Adhesive Systems in Noncarious Cervical Lesions at 2-year Follow-up: A Double-blind Randomized Clinical… DOI:10.2341/18-049-c | 2019 | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
Overlap with other reviews
Reviews that include the same primary studies are not independent evidence. Shared counts match studies by PMID, DOI or NCT, and otherwise by author and year (a probable match). Only the non-Cochrane dental reviews have study lists, so overlap with Cochrane reviews is not counted yet.
| Review | Shared studies | Jaccard |
|---|---|---|
| Secondary caries and marginal adaptation of ion-releasing versus resin composite restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of… (2022) | 5 | 0.05 |
Review question
| Element | Planned (methods) | Found (results) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Human patients with non-carious cervical lesions in permanent teeth restored with direct adhesive composite or resin-modified glass ionomer restorations | Patients with non-carious cervical lesions in permanent teeth (74 trials) |
| Intervention | Etch-and-rinse, self-etch and selective-etch adhesive strategies with a restorative material (composite resins, compomer, RMGI and others) | Composite strategies combining etching approach, adhesive category and restorative material (28 interventions for marginal adaptation, 33 for retention loss) |
| Comparison | Alternative etching-based restorative strategies, including RMGI as reference comparator | Resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGI) as network reference |
| Outcomes | Primary: marginal adaptation and retention loss; secondary: fracture, anatomic form, marginal discoloration, postoperative sensitivity, secondary caries, surface texture | Marginal adaptation failure (n=57 trials, 6798 patients, 1772 events); retention loss (n=61 trials, 7338 patients, 584 events); other outcomes described only narratively |
| Study designs | Randomized clinical trials with at least two distinct etching-based strategies | Randomized clinical trials (n=74) |
| Timing | Longest available follow-up used for primary analysis; earlier follow-ups for sensitivity | Follow-up up to 72 months; longest follow-up analyzed |
AMSTAR 2 items
Two independent extractors rated each item. Their ratings are shown side by side because they have not been reconciled yet. The overall rating follows Shea et al. 2017: one critical flaw gives Low, more than one gives Critically Low.
| Item | Extractor A | Extractor B | Agree |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Research question includes PICO components | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 2Protocol established before the reviewcritical | Partial Yes | Partial Yes | yes |
| 3Choice of study designs explained | Yes | No | no |
| 4Comprehensive literature searchcritical | Partial Yes | Partial Yes | yes |
| 5Study selection in duplicate | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 6Data extraction in duplicate | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 7List of excluded studies with reasonscritical | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 8Included studies described in detail | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 9Risk of bias assessed satisfactorilycritical | RCT: Yes · NRSI: N/A | NRSI: N/A · RCT: Yes | no |
| 10Funding of included studies reported | No | No | yes |
| 11Appropriate meta-analysis methodscritical | RCT: Yes · NRSI: N/A | NRSI: N/A · RCT: Yes | no |
| 12Impact of risk of bias on the pooled results | No | Yes | no |
| 13Risk of bias accounted for in interpretationcritical | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 14Heterogeneity explained | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 15Publication bias investigatedcritical | No | No | yes |
| 16Conflicts of interest reported | Yes | Yes | yes |
| Overall | Low | Low | yes |