Clinical comparison of postoperative sensitivity for an adhesive resin cement containing 4-META and a conventional glass-lonomer cement.

PURPOSE: The aim of this clinical 2-year follow-up study was to compare the postoperative sensitivity of abutment teeth restored with full coverage restorations retained with either conventional glass-ionomer cement or a new adhesive resin cement containing 4-methacrylolyloxyethyl trimellitate anhydride (4-META). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients received 120 full-coverage restorations on vital abutment teeth, cemented with either a glass-ionomer cement (Ketac-Cem) or a new adhesive resin cement (Chemiace II). A randomized split-mouth design and a patient double-blind data acquisition protocol were used. The teeth were examined before cementation, after 1 week, and after 6, 12, and 24 months. RESULTS: With regard to postcementation sensitivity, a low incidence was observed for both groups. With the adhesive resin cement, little postoperative hypersensitivity was observed after 1 week (13.3%), 6 months (5.9%), 12 months (2.1%), and 24 months (none); results were similar with the conventional glass-ionomer cement Ketac-Cem after 1 week (5.9%), 6 months (5.9%), 12 months (6.4%), and 24 months (none). After 6 months, 2 teeth of the Chemiace II group showed no sensitivity. Endodontic treatment was carried out for these 2 abutment teeth. After 24 months, no cases of postoperative hypersensitivity were recorded for either group. CONCLUSION: In this study, the incidence of postoperative hypersensitivity after cementation of full-crown restorations with a conventional glass-ionomer cement and a new adhesive resin cement was similar.