18-month clinical evaluation of a copper-containing universal adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions: A double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

What Was Tested

This randomized controlled trial looks at Copper (Supplement).

This study aimed to evaluate the addition of copper nanoparticles (CuNp) on the clinical performance of a universal adhesive system used as etch-and-rinse (ER) and self-etch (SE).

Who Took Part

The study group was 36 subjects.

The restorations were evaluated at baseline and 6, 12 and 18 months using the FDI and USPHS criteria.

How the Study Was Run

The researchers set it up as a randomized and double-blind study.

Because people in this Copper (Supplement) study were split into groups at random, differences between the groups are less likely to reflect who happened to join each one.

As a double-blind Copper (Supplement) study, the assignments were hidden from both participants and investigators until the end.

Statistical analyses were performed using appropriate tests (α = 0.05).

What Was Measured

Topics PubMed links to this paper include Composite Resins, Copper, Dental Bonding, Dental Cements, Dental Restoration Failure, Dental Restoration, Permanent and Dentin-Bonding Agents.

Author keywords: Clinical trial, Copper nanoparticles, Longevity, Non-carious cervical lesion and Universal adhesive system.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized and double-blind study of Copper (Supplement) in 36 subjects.

With fewer than 40 people, it is a small study, so it is better read as an early signal for further research than as a settled answer.

Its findings take up roughly 3 sentences of the abstract and are left out here on purpose; the source paper is the place to read them.

The publication is from 2019 (Journal of dentistry), a journal based in England.

More context: the Copper (Supplement) compound page, all human trials.