Clinical longitudinal evaluation of composite resin restorations in non-carious cervical lesions using direct and direct-indirect techniques: a randomized study

The purpose of this randomized split-mouth clinical study was to longitudinally evaluate the effectiveness of composite resin restorations of non-carious cervical lesions performed by direct and semi-direct techniques. A total of 30 volunteers with a need for class V cervical restorations were selected. Each patient received two restorations, one performed by the direct technique and the other by the direct-indirect technique, totaling 60 restorations. Assessment at baseline, 7 days, 6, 12 and 24 months, we performed using the modified USPHS criteria. Each patient was evaluated at return by two calibrated examiners. Data analysis was performed through descriptive statistics analysis using percentage of success of the restorations according to the criteria studied and scores obtained. For inferential analysis, the Student T test was used to evaluate the differences between extension, depth and time. Chi-Square/Fisher tests were used to compare rates between groups after each period (p <0.05). The results were evaluated by survival and annual failure rates (Kaplan-Meier). Differences were detected regarding to time, in which direct and direct-indirect procedures last 21.8(± 14.50) and 35.3 (± 19.89) minutes, respectively. Of the 60 restorations performed, 1 direct restoration was lost due to retention failure and no patient was missing the return in 7 days. At 6 months, 4 restorations were lost due to lack of retention in the direct technique and 5 restorations were lost for the same reason in the direct-indirect technique. Only 1 patient was absent. At 12 months return, 2 restorations were lost and 2 patients were absent in both techniques. And at 24 months, 2 patients did not attend the return and no restoration failed by the retention criterion by the direct technique. In the direct-indirect technique, 1 patient was absent and 1 restoration was lost due to lack of retention. The cumulative success of the direct technique was 99%, 93.1%, 88.5% and 88.5% in the 7-day, 6th, 12th and 24thmonths periods respectively. In the direct-indirect technique, cumulative success was 100%, 92.8%, 88.4% and 83.7% in the 7-day, 6, 12 and 24-month periods, respectively. It is concluded that, regardless of the technique employed, both are good restorative options and have high cumulative success rates in the studied periods. Working time was longer in the direct-indirect technique than in the direct technique. There was reduction of dental sensitivity in both techniques. There was gingival trauma immediately after the restorative procedures performed by the two techniques, with trauma reduction with the along the evaluated periods