To evaluate whether the correlation between in vitro bond strength data and estimated clinical retention rates of cervical restorations after two years depends on pooled data obtained from multicenter studies or single-test data.Pooled mean data for six dentin adhesive systems (Adper Prompt L-Pop, Clearfil SE, OptiBond FL, Prime & Bond NT, Single Bond, and Scotchbond Multipurpose) and four laboratory methods (macroshear, microshear, macrotensile and microtensile bond strength test) (Scherrer et al, 2010) were correlated to estimated pooled two-year retention rates of Class V restorations using the same adhesive systems. For bond strength data from a single test institute, the literature search in SCOPUS revealed one study that tested all six adhesive systems (microtensile) and two that tested five of the six systems (microtensile, macroshear). The correlation was determined with a database designed to perform a meta-analysis on the clinical performance of cervical restorations (Heintze et al, 2010). The clinical data were pooled and adjusted in a linear mixed model, taking the study effect, dentin preparation, type of isolation and bevelling of enamel into account. A regression analysis was carried out to evaluate the correlation between clinical and laboratory findings.The results of the regression analysis for the pooled data revealed that only the macrotensile (adjusted R2 = 0.86) and microtensile tests (adjusted R2 = 0.64), but not the shear and the microshear tests, correlated well with the clinical findings. As regards the data from a single-test institute, the correlation was not statistically significant.Macrotensile and microtensile bond strength tests showed an adequate correlation with the retention rate of cervical restorations after two years. Bond strength tests should be carried out by different operators and/or research institutes to determine the reliability and technique sensitivity of the material under investigation.