ArticleJournal of dental research2011
The use of mouse models to investigate shear bond strength in amelogenesis imperfecta.
Article in Journal of dental research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pretreatments to bonding on enamel and dentin disorders: a systematic review.Evidence-based dentistry · 2024Pooled it
- Integrative multi-omics and bioinformatic analysis ofThe Japanese dental science review · 2026Review
- Amelogenesis imperfecta: therapeutic strategy from primary to permanent dentition across case reports.BMC oral health · 2018Article
- Shear bond strength of dentin and deproteinized enamel of amelogenesis imperfecta mouse incisors.Pediatric dentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Patients with amelogenesis imperfecta (AI) have defective enamel; therefore, bonded restorations of patients with AI have variable success rates. To distinguish which cases of AI may have good clinical outcomes with bonded materials, we evaluated etching characteristics and bond strength of enamel in mouse models, comparing wild-type (WT) with those having mutations in amelogenin (Amelx) and matrix metalloproteinase-20 (Mmp20), which mimic 2 forms of human AI. Etched enamel surfaces were compared for roughness by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images. Bonding was compared through shear bond strength (SBS) studies with 2 different systems (etch-and-rinse and self-etch). Etched enamel surfaces of incisors from Amelx knock-out (AmelxKO) mice appeared randomly organized and non-uniform compared with WT. Etching of Mmp20KO surfaces left little enamel, and the etching pattern was indistinguishable from unetched surfaces. SBS results were significantly different when AmelxKO and Mmp20KO enamel surfaces were compared. A significant increase in SBS was measured for all samples when the self-etch system was compared with the etch-and-rinse system. We have developed a novel system for testing shear bond strength of mouse incisors with AI variants, and analysis of these data may have important clinical implications for the treatment of patients with AI.
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.