ArticleJournal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects2014
Class III Restoration of Anterior Primary Teeth: In Vitro Retention Comparison of Conventional, Modified and Air-abrasion Treated Preparations.
Article in Journal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do the Pre-Existing Class III and Class V Composite Restorations Affect the Sealing Ability and Integrity of 3D-Printed Laminate Veneer Margins? An In Vitro Study.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Bond strength of conventional versus modified methods for Class IV restorations in primary incisors: An in vitro study.Journal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects · 2022Article
- 36 Months' Clinical Performance of Primary Incisors Restorations Depending on the Type of Restorative Technique Used: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Dentistry journal · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims. Anterior esthetic restoration is challenging in pediatric dentistry, due to limited durability and poor retention of the restoration.This study assessed the effect of air abrasion on tensile failure load of composite class III restorations using different preparation techniques. Materials and methods. 100 extracted human anterior primary teeth were divided, based on the preparation methods, into four groups each consisting of 25 subjects : conventional (A), labial surface bevel (B), conventional + air abrasion (C), and labial surface bevel + air abrasion (D). After restoring cavities, tensile failure load of samples was measured in Newton by Universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm per minute. The data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests using SPSS software. Results. There were statistically significant differences between groups A and C (P = 0.003), groups A and B (P & 0.001), groups A and D (P & 0.001), groups B and C (P = 0.028), groups B and D (P = 0.027), and also groups C and D (P& 0.001). Group D demonstrated the highest mean tensile failure load. Conclusion. Labial surface bevel treated by air abrasion showed significantly more retention of composite restoration.
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.