ArticleJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB
Biocompatibility of orthodontic adhesives in rat subcutaneous tissue.
Article in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of crevicular fluid cytokine levels after the application of surface sealants : A randomized trial.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2019Trial
- Bond strength, degree of conversion, and microorganism adhesion using different bracket-to-enamel bonding protocols.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2023Article
- Effect of degree of conversion on in vivo biocompatibility of flowable resin used for bioprotection of mini-implants.The Angle orthodontist · 2016Article
- Evaluation of the genotoxicity and cytotoxicity in the buccal epithelial cells of patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with three light-cured bonding composites by using micronucleus testing.Korean journal of orthodontics · 2014Article
- In Vitro Cytotoxicity Assessment of an Orthodontic Composite Containing Titanium-dioxide Nano-particles.Journal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of the present study was to verify the hypothesis that no difference in biocompatibility exists between different orthodontic adhesives. MATERIAL AND
methodsThirty male Wistar rats were used in this study and divided into five groups (n=6): Group 1 (control, distilled water), Group 2 (Concise), Group 3 (Xeno III), Group 4 (Transbond XT), and Group 5 (Transbond plus Self-Etching Primer). Two cavities were performed in the subcutaneous dorsum of each animal to place a polyvinyl sponge soaked with 2 drops of the respective adhesive in each surgical loci. Two animals of each group were sacrificed after 7, 15, and 30 days, and their tissues were analyzed by using an optical microscope.
resultsAt day 7, Groups 3 (Transbond XT) and 4 (Xeno III) showed intense mono- and polymorphonuclear inflammatory infiltrate with no differences between them, whereas Groups 1 (control) and 2 (Concise) showed moderate mononuclear inflammatory infiltrate. At day 15, severe inflammation was observed in Group 3 (Transbond XT) compared to other groups. At day 30, the same group showed a more expressive mononuclear inflammatory infiltrate compared to other groups.
conclusionAmong the orthodontic adhesive analyzed, it may be concluded that Transbond XT exhibited the worst biocompatibility. However, one cannot interpret the specificity of the data generated in vivo animal models as a human response.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.