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
Source abstract
Abstract
Non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) present restorative challenges due to substrate sclerosis and marginal stress concentration, making the adhesive strategy a key determinant of long-term performance. This systematic review and frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis, conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 and the PRISMA-NMA extension and prospectively registered in PROSPERO, compared restorative strategies defined by etching approach, adhesive category, and restorative material, with marginal adaptation and retention loss as the primary outcomes. PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus were searched without restrictions (25 January 2026), supplemented by alternative retrieval methods. Randomized clinical trials in permanent teeth evaluating at least two etching-based strategies (etch-and-rinse, self-etch, selective-etch, and/or resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGI)) were included. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and certainty of evidence with CINeMA. Seventy-four trials were eligible. Connected networks were established for marginal adaptation (57 studies; 28 interventions; 6798 patients; 1772 events) and retention loss (61 studies; 33 interventions; 7338 patients; 584 events). Selective-etch with a universal adhesive and nanocomposite reduced marginal adaptation failure compared with RMGI, whereas certain self-etch and non-universal combinations increased risk. For retention loss, selective-etch and etch-and-rinse protocols combined with universal adhesives and nanocomposites showed lower failure rates, while some self-etch or non-universal adhesive strategies performed less favorably. Overall confidence was predominantly high, with downgrading mainly due to imprecision and heterogeneity. Strategies incorporating selective enamel etching or etch-and-rinse approaches combined with universal adhesives and nanocomposites demonstrated the most consistent clinical advantages.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Dental Erosion and Treatment · Dental Health and Care Utilization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Carrera de Odontología, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Santiago 8900000, Chile
Penn Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
Facultad de Odontología, Universidad Autónoma del Paraguay, Asunción 1255, Paraguay
College of Dental Medicine, Nova Southeastern University, Davie, FL 33314, USA
References (31)
Show source-provided references
1. One-year Clinical Evaluation of Resin Composite Restorations of Noncarious Cervical Lesions in Smokers
2. Thirteen-year randomized controlled clinical trial of a two-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions10.1016/j.dental.2015.01.005 ↗
3. Clinical evaluation of a universal adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions10.1111/jerd.12622 ↗
4. Clinical evaluation of a self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions
5. Eighteen-month clinical performance of a self-etching primer in unprepared class V resin restorations
6. Clinical Performance of Filled/Nanofilled Versus Nonfilled Adhesive Systems in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis10.2341/19-252-L ↗
7. Stress Analysis of Non Carious Cervical Lesion and Cervical Composite Resin Restoration10.22974/jkda.2010.48.4.006 ↗
8. Current modifications of dental adhesive systems for composite resin restorations: A review in literature10.1080/01694243.2021.1924499 ↗
9. Clinical effects of different etching modes for universal adhesives: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.21037/apm-21-890 ↗
10. Effect of different monomer-based composites and acid etching pre-treatment of enamel on the microleakage using self-etch adhesives systems10.3109/00016357.2014.887771 ↗
11. The effects of dental adhesives total etch; self-etch and selective etch application procedures on microleakage in class II composite restorations10.26650/eor.20231197657 ↗
12. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews10.1136/bmj.n71 ↗
13. The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations10.7326/M14-2385 ↗
14. Adhesive dentistry: Current concepts and clinical considerations10.1111/jerd.12692 ↗
15. Standardization of clinical investigators for studies of restorative materials
16. Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials10.1007/s00784-006-0095-7 ↗
17. Clinical investigation of dental adhesive systems. Part I: An in vivo study10.1016/0022-3913(86)90333-1 ↗
18. Valizadeh, A., Moassefi, M., Nakhostin-Ansari, A., Hosseini Asl, S.H., Saghab Torbati, M., Aghajani, R., Maleki Ghorbani, Z., and Faghani, S. (2022). Abstract screening using the automated tool Rayyan: Results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews. BMC Med. Res. Methodol., 22.10.1186/s12874-022-01631-8 ↗
19. Higgins, J. (2026, January 24). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Available online: www.cochrane-handbook.org.
20. How to perform a meta-analysis with R: A practical tutorial
21. Nikolakopoulou, A., Higgins, J.P.T., Papakonstantinou, T., Chaimani, A., Del Giovane, C., Egger, M., and Salanti, G. (2020). CINeMA: An approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis. PLoS Med., 17.10.1371/journal.pmed.1003082 ↗
22. The rank-heat plot is a novel way to present the results from a network meta-analysis including multiple outcomes10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.02.016 ↗
23. Does Acid Etching Influence the Adhesion of Universal Adhesive Systems in Noncarious Cervical Lesions? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis10.2341/22-067-LIT ↗
24. Clinical Efficiency of Self-etching One-Step and Two-Step Adhesives in NCCL: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis10.2341/19-185-L ↗
25. Is There Evidence that Three-step Etch-and-Rinse Adhesives Have Better Retention Rates than One-step Self-etch Adhesives in Noncarious Cervical Lesions? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
26. Is clinical behavior of composite restorations placed in non-carious cervical lesions influenced by the application mode of universal adhesives? A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1016/j.dental.2021.08.017 ↗
27. Self-adhesive flowable composite resins and flowable composite resins in permanent teeth with occlusal cavities: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104691 ↗
28. Effect of Adhesive Strategy of Universal Adhesives in Noncarious Cervical Lesions—An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis10.1038/s41405-022-00124-6 ↗
29. Glass Ionomer Cements Compared With Composite Resin in Restoration of Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03969 ↗
30. Clinical Longevity of Direct Dental Restorations: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews
31. Restorative and Adhesive Strategies for Cervical Carious Lesions: A Systematic Review, Pairwise and Network Meta-Analysis