Afolabi AO, Shaba OP, Adegbulugbe IC Distribution and characteristics of non carious cervical lesions in an adult Nigerian population. Nig Q J Hosp Med. 2012; 22:1-6
Kumar S, Kumar A, Debnath N Prevalence and risk factors for non-carious cervical lesions in children attending special needs schools in India. J Oral Sci. 2015; 57:37-43 https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.57.37
Szesz A, Parreiras S, Martini E, Reis A, Loguercio A Effect of flowable composites on the clinical performance of non-carious cervical lesions: a systematic review and metaanalysis. J Dent. 2017; 65:11-21 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2017.07.00
Kampanas NS, Antoniadou M Glass ionomer cements for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions in the geriatric patient. J Funct Biomater. 2018; 9 https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb9030042
Goodacre CJ, Eugene Roberts W, Munoz CA Non carious cervical lesions: Morphology and progression, prevalence, etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical guidelines for restoration. J Prosthodont. 2023; 32:e1-e18 https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13585
Santos MJ, Ari N, Steele S, Costella J, Banting D Retention of tooth-colored restorations in non-carious cervical lesions: a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig. 2014; 18:1369-1381 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1220-7
Kim SY, Lee KW, Seong SR Twoyear clinical effectiveness of adhesives and retention form on resin composite restorations of non-carious cervical lesions. Oper Dent. 2009; 34:507-515 https://doi.org/10.2341/08-006C
Soares PV, Milito GA, Pereira FA The effects of non carious cervical lesions – morphology, load type and restoration – on the biomechanical behavior of maxillary premolars: a finite element analysis. Biosci J. 2013; 29:526-535
Kubo S, Yokota H, Yokota H, Hayashi Y Challenges to the clinical placement and evaluation of adhesively-bonded, cervical composite restorations. Dent Mater. 2013; 29:10-27 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.08.003
Mahn E, Rousson V, Heintze S Meta-analysis of the influence of bonding parameters on the clinical outcome of tooth-colored cervical restorations. J Adhes Dent. 2015; 17:391-403 https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a35008
Hur B, Kim HC, Park JK, Versluis A Characteristics of non-carious cervical lesions: an ex vivo study using micro computed tomography. J Oral Rehabil. 2011; 38:469-474 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02172.x
Meraner M Soft tissue management for difficult cervical restorations. Gen Dent. 2006; 54:117-120
Restoration of noncarious cervical lesions: when, why, and how. 2012. 10.1155/2012/687058
Zhu JJ, Tang AT, Matinlinna JP, Hägg U Acid etching of human enamel in clinical applications: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112:122-135 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.08.024
Kwong SM, Tay FR, Yip HK An ultrastructural study of the application of dentine adhesives to acid-conditioned sclerotic dentine. J Dent. 2000; 28:515-528 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(00)00032-4
Daley TJ, Harbrow DJ, Kahler B, Young WG The cervical wedge-shaped lesion in teeth: a light and electron microscopic study. Aust Dent J. 2009; 54:212-219 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2009.01121.x
Schroeder M, Reis A, Luque-Martinez I Effect of enamel bevel on retention of cervical composite resin restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2015; 43:777-788 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2015.02.017
Peumans M, Politano G, Van Meerbeek B Treatment of noncarious cervical lesions: when, why, and how. Int J Esthet Dent. 2020; 15:16-42
Perez CR Alternative technique for class V resin composite restorations with minimum finishing/polishing procedures. Oper Dent. 2010; 35:375-379 https://doi.org/10.2341/09-310-TR
Takehara J, Takano T, Akhter R, Morita M Correlations of non-carious cervical lesions and occlusal factors determined by using pressure-detecting sheet. J Dent. 2008; 36:774-779 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2008.05.009
Maia RR, Reis RS, Moro AF, Perez CR, Pessôa BM, Dias KR Properties evaluation of silorane, low-shrinkage, non-flowable and flowable resin-based composites in dentistry. Peer J. 2015; 3 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.864
Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Poitevin A Relationship between bond-strength tests and clinical outcomes. Dent Mater. 2010; 26:e100-121 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.148
Peumans M, De Munck J, Mine A, Van Meerbeek B Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions. A systematic review. Dent Mater. 2014; 30:1089-1103 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.07.007
Schroeder M, Correa IC, Bauer J Influence of adhesive strategy on clinical parameters in cervical restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2017; 62:36-53 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2017.05.006
Szesz A, Parreiras S, Reis A, Loguercio A Selective enamel etching in cervical lesions for self-etch adhesives: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2016; 53:1-11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2016.05.009
Perdigão J, Ceballos L, Giráldez I Effect of a hydrophobic bonding resin on the 36-month performance of a universal adhesive – a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2020; 24:765-776 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-02940-x
Oz FD, Ergin E, Canatan S Twenty-four-month clinical performance of different universal adhesives in etch-and-rinse, selective etching and self-etch application modes in NCCL – a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Appl Oral Sci. 2019; 27 https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0358
Kubo S, Yokota H, Yokota H, Hayashi Y Twoyear clinical evaluation of one-step self-etch systems in non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent. 2009; 37:149-155 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2008.10.008
Canali GD, Ignácio SA, Rached RN, Souza EM One-year clinical evaluation of bulk-fill flowable vs. regular nanofilled composite in non-carious cervical lesions. Clin Oral Investig. 2019; 23:889-897 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2509-8
Kubo S, Yokota H, Yokota H, Hayashi Y Threeyear clinical evaluation of a flowable and a hybrid resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent. 2010; 38:191-200 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2009.10.003
Peumans M, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Van Meerbeek B Thirteen-year randomized controlled clinical trial of a two-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions. Dent Mater. 2015; 31:308-314 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2015.01.005
Koc Vural U, Meral E, Ergin E, Gurgan S Sixtymonth comparative evaluation of a glass hybrid restorative and a composite resin in non-carious cervical lesions of bruxist individuals. Clin Oral Investig. 2024; 28 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05570-0
Stewardson DA, Thornley P Burke FJT. The survival of Class V restorations in general dental practice: part 3, five-year survival. Br Dent J. 2012; 212 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.367
Vaid DS, Shah NC, Bilgi PS One year comparative clinical evaluation of EQUIA with resin-modified glass ionomer and a nanohybrid composite in noncarious cervical lesions. J Conserv Dent. 2015; 18:449-452 https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.168805
Franco EB, Benetti AR, Ishikiriama SK 5-year clinical performance of resin composite versus resin modified glass ionomer restorative system in non-carious cervical lesions. Oper Dent. 2006; 31:403-408 https://doi.org/10.2341/05-87
Verma S, Singla R, Gill GS, Jain N Effect of dentin roughening and type of composite material on the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: an in vivo study with 18 months of follow-up. Restor Dent Endod. 2023; 48 https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2023.48.e35
Boing TF, de Geus JL, Wambier LM Are glass-ionomer cement restorations in cervical lesions more long-lasting than resin-based composite resins? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Adhes Dent. 2018; 20:435-452 https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a41310
Bheda R, Mulay S, Tandale AS Evaluation of giomer using eighth generation bonding agent and resin-modified glass ionomer cement restoration in non-carious cervical lesions. Indian J Dent Res. 2023; 34:350-353 https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_68_20
Celik EU, Tunac AT, Yilmaz F Three-year clinical evaluation of high-viscosity glass ionomer restorations in non-carious cervical lesions: a randomised controlled split-mouth clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2019; 23:1473-1480 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2575-y
Jager S, Balthazard R, Dahoun A, Mortier E Filler content, surface microhardness, and rheological properties of various flowable resin composites. Oper Dent. 2016; 41:655-665 https://doi.org/10.2341/16-031-L
Shaalan OO, Abou-Auf E, El Zoghby AF Clinical evaluation of flowable resin composite versus conventional resin composite in carious and noncarious lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Conserv Dent. 2017; 20:380-385 https://doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_226_17
Caneppele TMF, Meirelles LCF, Rocha RS A 2-year clinical evaluation of direct and semidirect resin composite restorations in noncarious cervical lesions: a randomized clinical study. Clin Oral Investig. 2020; 24:1321-1331 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-03011-x
The challenges of composite restorations of non-carious cervical lesions Zakaria Karimi Dental Update 2025 52:5, 340-346.
Authors
ZakariaKarimi
MD, Associate Professor in Conservative Dentistry Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Mohammed V University, Rabat, Mohammed V Military Teaching Hospital, Rabat, Morocco.
Although the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) may seem straightforward, it is the restorative therapy with the highest rate of clinical failure. This may be due to marginal discolouration, fracture or loss of the restoration, the appearance of secondary caries or aggravation or the creation of periodontal problems. In view of this, it is essential to take into account the difficulties in achieving these restorations and addressing these by choosing the most suitable materials and techniques. This review summarizes the current understanding of restorative management of NCCLs with composite resin and discusses factors affecting efficacy and difficulties encountered during the implementation in order to propose an approach that leads to a higher success rate and longevity of the restoration.
CPD/Clinical Relevance:
Choosing a protocol that achieves a high success rate for the restorative management of NCCLs with composite resin is important.
Article
A non-carious cervical lesion (NCCL) involves the loss of hard tooth tissue at the cemento-enamel junction that is not caused by caries. There is consensus that the aetiology of NCCLs is multifactorial and can involve several factors, including erosion, abrasion and abfraction.1 The prevalence and severity of NCCLs has increased owing to the increase in the number of older people.2
NCCLs often occur on the buccal face of premolars and canines, with a higher prevalence in the first premolars.3 The appearance of NCCLs varies from a shallow depression to a broad disc-shaped lesion to a large wedge-shaped defect. The floor of the lesion may be flat, indented or sharply angled.4
Although the restoration of NCCLs does not treat their aetiology, it replaces lost tissue, restores dental structural integrity, reduces further wear, relieves dentine hypersensitivity (when present) and improves aesthetics.5
Register now to continue reading
Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:
