Evaluation Of the BEAUTIBOND XTREME Adhesive in Class I and II Restorations: One-Year Results.
A Randomized Prospective Clinical Study Evaluating the Effectiveness of the BEAUTIBOND XTREME Adhesive System Using Different Bonding Techniques in Class I and II Restorations: One-Year Results.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
São Paulo
-
Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil, 14040-904
- Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry of the University of São Paulo (FORP-USP)
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Adults aged 18 years or older
- Occlusal stability supported by molars, Presence of at least one premolar or one molar with Class I/II cavities suitable for direct restoration or restoration replacement
- Ability to attend evaluation and regular maintenance appointments
- No clinical symptoms or radiographic signs suggesting pulp involvement
- No periodontal pockets or compromised biological space invasion
- Ability to perform absolute isolation of the operative field and subsequent restoration of the cavity with composite resin
- Active carious lesion
- Occlusal/occlusoproximal surface of molars and premolars, with a radiographic image showing shallow, medium, or deep dentin involvement, which is preventing the patient from effectively controlling bacterial biofilm, or showing some type of sensitivity
- Cavity preparation margins (cavosurface) in enamel or dentin.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Poor oral hygiene control
- Patients undergoing orthodontic treatment
- Pregnant or lactating women
- Oral complications such as: bruxism, other parafunctional habits reinforcing the diagnosis of TMD (temporomandibular disorders), periodontal problems
- Pregnant or breastfeeding women
- Presence of uncontrolled systemic diseases
- Patients at high risk for caries.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Triple
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: CI: Class I cavities restored with the total acid-etching technique.
Class I cavities restored with the total acid-etching technique.
|
the enamel was etched for 30 seconds and the dentin for 15 seconds using 35% phosphoric acid gel (Ultradent).
The acid was then rinsed off, and excess moisture was removed with an air spray.
To protect the dentin during air blasting, an absorbent paper was held over it using clinical tweezers, ensuring a whitish appearance for the enamel and slightly moist dentin.
Excess water on the cotton roll was dried as well.
The BeautiBond Xtreme adhesive system was applied without any waiting time, followed by a gentle air spray for 3 seconds and then a strong air blast to ensure solvent evaporation.
Finally, the adhesive was light-cured for 5 seconds using a LED photopolymerizer (Gran Valo LED Curing Light, Ultradent).
Other Names:
|
|
Experimental: CII: Class II cavities restored with the total acid-etching technique.
Class II cavities restored with the total acid-etching technique.
|
the enamel was etched for 30 seconds and the dentin for 15 seconds using 35% phosphoric acid gel (Ultradent).
The acid was then rinsed off, and excess moisture was removed with an air spray.
To protect the dentin during air blasting, an absorbent paper was held over it using clinical tweezers, ensuring a whitish appearance for the enamel and slightly moist dentin.
Excess water on the cotton roll was dried as well.
The BeautiBond Xtreme adhesive system was applied without any waiting time, followed by a gentle air spray for 3 seconds and then a strong air blast to ensure solvent evaporation.
Finally, the adhesive was light-cured for 5 seconds using a LED photopolymerizer (Gran Valo LED Curing Light, Ultradent).
Other Names:
|
|
Experimental: TI: Class I cavities restored with the self-etching technique.
Class I cavities restored with the self-etching technique.
|
no acid etching was performed on either the enamel or dentin.
The BeautiBond Xtreme adhesive system was applied immediately, without any waiting time, followed by a gentle air spray for 3 seconds and then a strong air blast to ensure solvent evaporation.
The adhesive was then light-cured for 5 seconds using a LED photopolymerizer (Gran Valo LED Curing Light, Ultradent).
Other Names:
|
|
Experimental: TII: Class II cavities restored with the self-etching technique.
Class II cavities restored with the self-etching technique.
|
no acid etching was performed on either the enamel or dentin.
The BeautiBond Xtreme adhesive system was applied immediately, without any waiting time, followed by a gentle air spray for 3 seconds and then a strong air blast to ensure solvent evaporation.
The adhesive was then light-cured for 5 seconds using a LED photopolymerizer (Gran Valo LED Curing Light, Ultradent).
Other Names:
|
|
Experimental: TIII: Class I cavities restored with the select-etching technique.
Class I cavities restored with the select-etching technique
|
the enamel was etched for 15 seconds using 35% phosphoric acid gel (Ultradent).
The acid was then rinsed off, and excess moisture was removed with an air spray, leaving the enamel with a whitish appearance.
Excess water on the cotton roll was also dried.
Next, the BeautiBond Xtreme adhesive system was applied immediately, without any waiting time, followed by a gentle air spray for 3 seconds and then a strong air blast to ensure solvent evaporation.
The adhesive was then light-cured for 5 seconds using a LED photopolymerizer (Gran Valo LED Curing Light, Ultradent).
Other Names:
|
|
Experimental: TIV: Class II cavities restorCed with the select-etching technique.
Class II cavities restorCed with the select-etching technique.
|
the enamel was etched for 15 seconds using 35% phosphoric acid gel (Ultradent).
The acid was then rinsed off, and excess moisture was removed with an air spray, leaving the enamel with a whitish appearance.
Excess water on the cotton roll was also dried.
Next, the BeautiBond Xtreme adhesive system was applied immediately, without any waiting time, followed by a gentle air spray for 3 seconds and then a strong air blast to ensure solvent evaporation.
The adhesive was then light-cured for 5 seconds using a LED photopolymerizer (Gran Valo LED Curing Light, Ultradent).
Other Names:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Anatomic Form
Time Frame: baseline, six months, and one year.
|
The anatomic form of the restoration was evaluated according to the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria at baseline, six months, and one year.
Restorations were classified as Alpha (continuity of the restoration with the existing anatomic form), Bravo (continuity of the restoration with partial degradation but clinically acceptable), or Charlie (continuity of the restoration compromised, requiring replacement).
|
baseline, six months, and one year.
|
|
Marginal Adaptation
Time Frame: baseline, six months, and one year.
|
Marginal adaptation was visually analyzed using an explorer to detect crevices or marginal failures.
Classifications included Alpha (no visible evidence of a crevice along the margin), Bravo (visible evidence of a crevice along the margin where the explorer can penetrate or catch), and Charlie (the explorer penetrates the crevice, exposing dentin or base).
|
baseline, six months, and one year.
|
|
Marginal Discoloration
Time Frame: baseline, six months, and one year.
|
Marginal discoloration was assessed by recording any color changes at the interface between the restoration and tooth structure.
Restorations were classified as Alpha (no visible discoloration), Bravo (discoloration present but not penetrating along the margin in a pulpal direction), or Charlie (deep discoloration penetrating along the margin toward the pulp).
|
baseline, six months, and one year.
|
|
Secondary Caries
Time Frame: baseline, six months, and one year.
|
The presence of secondary caries was clinically and radiographically evaluated throughout the study.
Restorations were classified as Alpha (no evidence of secondary caries) or Charlie (evidence of secondary caries around the restoration, requiring replacement).
|
baseline, six months, and one year.
|
|
Color Match
Time Frame: baseline, six months, and one year.
|
Color match was evaluated by comparing the restoration to the adjacent tooth structure in terms of color and translucency.
Classifications included Alpha (color and translucency compatible with the tooth structure), Bravo (color and translucency mismatch within the acceptable range), and Charlie (color and translucency mismatch outside the acceptable range).
|
baseline, six months, and one year.
|
|
Postoperative Sensitivity
Time Frame: baseline, six months, and one year.
|
Postoperative sensitivity was assessed through patient reports at different study periods.
Classifications included Alpha (no postoperative sensitivity after the restorative procedure and throughout the study), Bravo (slight sensitivity at any stage of the study), and Charlie (severe sensitivity at any stage of the study).
|
baseline, six months, and one year.
|
|
Surface Texture
Time Frame: baseline, six months, and one year.
|
The surface texture of the restoration was visually and tactilely evaluated using an explorer.
Restorations were classified as Alpha (no surface defects), Bravo (minimal surface defects), or Charlie (severe surface defects on the restoration).
|
baseline, six months, and one year.
|
|
Retention
Time Frame: baseline, six months, and one year.
|
Retention was evaluated by verifying the presence of the restoration over time.
Classifications included Alpha (no loss of restorative material) and Charlie (fracture and/or total loss of the restorative material).
|
baseline, six months, and one year.
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 61246422.4.0000.5498
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.