NCT05361746

Brief Summary

This is a prospective, controlled, within-subject, randomized, single-center study comparing Scotchbond Universal Plus (SBU+) and Scotchbond Universal (SBU) adhesives when used with Filtek restorative. The study will enroll Subjects scheduled to undergo Class-V non-carious cervical lesion (NCCL) restorations.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
38

participants targeted

Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Aug 2022

Typical duration for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

April 30, 2022

Completed
5 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

May 5, 2022

Completed
4 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

August 18, 2022

Completed
2.6 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

April 7, 2025

Completed
5 months until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

September 11, 2025

Completed
8 months until next milestone

Results Posted

Study results publicly available

April 24, 2026

Completed
Last Updated

April 24, 2026

Status Verified

April 1, 2026

Enrollment Period

2.6 years

First QC Date

April 30, 2022

Results QC Date

March 3, 2026

Last Update Submit

April 22, 2026

Conditions

Keywords

composite resinsdental adhesivesnoncarious lesionsabfraction lesionsbonding, dentalclinical studyScotchbond Universal plusScotchbond UniversalFiltekdental materials

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (2)

  • Retention of Restorative Material

    The percentage of restorations with partial or complete loss of the restorative materials.

    24 months post-restoration

  • Marginal Adaptation

    Marginal adaptation of restorations graded on a scale of 1-5 with a score of 1 being Excellent/very good and a score of 5 being Poor. Grading scale is based on modified FDI (Fédération Dentaire Internationale) World Dental Federation criteria. Scoring categories for marginal adaptation: 1. Excellent/very good: No clinically detectable gap. 2. Good: Marginal integrity deviates from the ideal but could be upgraded to ideal by polishing. 3. Sufficient/Satisfactory: Leakage/discoloration is present but limited to the marginal area. 4. Unsatisfactory: Localized gap larger than 250 µm, may result in exposure of dentine or base. 5. Poor: Generalized gap larger than 250 µm or the restoration is loose but in situ, re-placement necessary.

    24 months post-restoration

Secondary Outcomes (10)

  • Retention of Restorative Material

    6 months post-restoration

  • Marginal Adaptation

    6 months post restoration

  • Fracture of Restorative Material

    6 months post-restoration

  • Secondary Caries

    6 months post-restoration

  • Retention of Restorative Material

    12 months post-restoration

  • +5 more secondary outcomes

Study Arms (2)

SBU+ Treatment Group

EXPERIMENTAL

In a split-mouth design, either 1 tooth (for Subjects with 2 eligible teeth) or 2 teeth (for Subjects with 4 eligible teeth) with Class-V NCCLs underwent restoration(s) using Scotchbond Universal Plus (SBU+) Adhesive .

Device: Scotchbond Universal Plus Adhesive

SBU Control Group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

In a split-mouth design, either 1 tooth (for Subjects with 2 eligible teeth) or 2 teeth (for Subjects with 4 eligible teeth) with Class-V NCCLs underwent restoration(s) using the predicate device, Scotchbond Universal (SBU) Adhesive.

Device: Scotchbond Universal Adhesive

Interventions

Eligible teeth with Class-V NCCLs randomized to the SBU Control group underwent restoration(s) using Scotchbond Universal Plus (SBU) Adhesive using total-etch mode and Filtek Universal Restorative material.

SBU Control Group

Eligible teeth with Class-V NCCLs randomized to the SBU+ treatment group underwent restoration(s) using Scotchbond Universal Plus (SBU+) Adhesive using total-etch mode and Filtek Universal Restorative material.

SBU+ Treatment Group

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Subjects may be included that meet the following criteria:
  • Subject is at least 18 years of age at the time of consent
  • Subject is able to provide their own informed consent
  • Subject has a minimum of two teeth that:
  • have non-carious Class V lesions that are at least 1.5 mm deep
  • are not devitalized
  • have not undergone root canal treatment
  • Subject has an Approximal Plaque Index score ≤ 40% as assessed via explorer and without the use of plaque-disclosing agents
  • Subject is able and willing to return for all scheduled study visits
  • Subject meets the Level-I or Level-II classification criteria of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status Classification System For Dental Patient Care

You may not qualify if:

  • Subjects may not be included that meet any of the following criteria:
  • Subject has any of the following:
  • rampant caries
  • chronic periodontitis
  • salivary gland dysfunction
  • Subject is unable, for any reason, to tolerate the procedure time required to place the restorations
  • Subject has unacceptable oral hygiene (eg, chronic moderate to heavy plaque accumulation along the gumline)
  • Subject has known sensitivity to the study product components (ie, acrylate)
  • Subject is planned to be enrolled in another investigational trial that requires additional interventions at any time during the study

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Louisiana State University HSC-Health, School of Dentistry

New Orleans, Louisiana, 70119, United States

Location

Related Publications (3)

  • Hickel R, Peschke A, Tyas M, Mjor I, Bayne S, Peters M, Hiller KA, Randall R, Vanherle G, Heintze SD. FDI World Dental Federation: clinical criteria for the evaluation of direct and indirect restorations-update and clinical examples. Clin Oral Investig. 2010 Aug;14(4):349-66. doi: 10.1007/s00784-010-0432-8. Epub 2010 Jul 14.

    PMID: 20628774BACKGROUND
  • Burgess JO, Sadid-Zadeh R, Cakir D, Ramp LC. Clinical evaluation of self-etch and total-etch adhesive systems in noncarious cervical lesions: a two-year report. Oper Dent. 2013 Sep-Oct;38(5):477-87. doi: 10.2341/12-355-CR. Epub 2013 Jan 17.

    PMID: 23327229BACKGROUND
  • Lawson NC, Robles A, Fu CC, Lin CP, Sawlani K, Burgess JO. Two-year clinical trial of a universal adhesive in total-etch and self-etch mode in non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent. 2015 Oct;43(10):1229-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2015.07.009. Epub 2015 Jul 29.

    PMID: 26231300BACKGROUND

Limitations and Caveats

There was a larger than expected amount of attrition during this study, resulting in fewer teeth assessed at the primary 2-year data than anticipated. With higher attrition, the precision of the estimates of the primary results is less than anticipated with slightly wider 95% confidence intervals. Additionally, there is a chance of attrition bias, where the characteristics of the participants who leave the study differ from those who remain.

Results Point of Contact

Title
Paula Myhre
Organization
Solventum US LLC

Study Officials

  • Alika Yu, DDS

    Louisiana State University HSC Health, School of Dentistry

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Publication Agreements

PI is Sponsor Employee
No
Restriction Type
OTHER
Restrictive Agreement
Yes

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
SINGLE
Who Masked
OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
Masking Details
All assessments were performed by two dental examiners that were independent of the dentist that placed the restorations and were blinded to the treatment arms.
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Model Details: Each subject had either two restorations (two teeth) or four restorations (four teeth) performed at the beginning of the study, with each tooth restoration using only one type of adhesive. Study teeth were paired according to lesion depth and randomized to treatment in a 1:1 ratio with at least half of the teeth (ie, 1 tooth for Subjects with 2 eligible teeth or 2 teeth for Subjects with 4 eligible teeth) randomized to undergo restoration(s) using Scotchbond Universal Plus Adhesive (SBU+ Treatment group) and the other half of the teeth undergoing restoration(s) using Scotchbond Universal Adhesive (SBU Control group).
Sponsor Type
INDUSTRY
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

April 30, 2022

First Posted

May 5, 2022

Study Start

August 18, 2022

Primary Completion

April 7, 2025

Study Completion

September 11, 2025

Last Updated

April 24, 2026

Results First Posted

April 24, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-04

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

Locations