Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25190266›Full record

ReviewJournal of dental research2014

Proteins, pathogens, and failure at the composite-tooth interface.

P Spencer, Q Ye, A Misra, S E P Goncalves, J S Laurence

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of dental research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed
13.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

65 citing papers in PubMed, 140 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

P SpencerDepartment of Mechanical Engineering Bioengineering Research Center pspencer@ku.edu.
Q YeBioengineering Research Center.
A MisraBioengineering Research Center Department of Civil Engineering, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA.
S E P GoncalvesSchool of Dentistry of São José dos Campos, UNESP, Univ Estadual Paulista, São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil.
J S LaurenceDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA.
Bioengineering Center · RUUniversity of Kansas · USUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BR

Funding

Im/Miscible Adhesive/Dentin Interface:Structure/MechanicR01DE014392 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI KANSAS CITY · PI SPENCER, PAULETTE · 2003 to 2011
$2.8M
Proton Sponge Adhesives, Interfacial Milieu: Molecular Structure-MechanicsR01DE022054 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS LAWRENCE · PI LAURENCE, JENNIFER S., SPENCER, PAULETTE · 2011 to 2015
$2.0M
NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE014392NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE022054NIDCR NIH HHS R01DE022054NIDCR NIH HHS R01DE14392NIDCR NIH HHS R01DE14392-08S1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the United States, composites accounted for nearly 70% of the 173.2 million composite and amalgam restorations placed in 2006 (Kingman et al., 2012), and it is likely that the use of composite will continue to increase as dentists phase out dental amalgam. This trend is not, however, without consequences. The failure rate of composite restorations is double that of amalgam (Ferracane, 2013). Composite restorations accumulate more biofilm, experience more secondary decay, and require more frequent replacement. In vivo biodegradation of the adhesive bond at the composite-tooth interface is a major contributor to the cascade of events leading to restoration failure. Binding by proteins, particularly gp340, from the salivary pellicle leads to biofilm attachment, which accelerates degradation of the interfacial bond and demineralization of the tooth by recruiting the pioneer bacterium Streptococcus mutans to the surface. Bacterial production of lactic acid lowers the pH of the oral microenvironment, erodes hydroxyapatite in enamel and dentin, and promotes hydrolysis of the adhesive. Secreted esterases further hydrolyze the adhesive polymer, exposing the soft underlying collagenous dentinal matrix and allowing further infiltration by the pathogenic biofilm. Manifold approaches are being pursued to increase the longevity of composite dental restorations based on the major contributing factors responsible for degradation. The key material and biological components and the interactions involved in the destructive processes, including recent advances in understanding the structural and molecular basis of biofilm recruitment, are described in this review. Innovative strategies to mitigate these pathogenic effects and slow deterioration are discussed.

Indexed as

BiofilmsDental Restoration FailureBacterial AdhesionComposite ResinsDental BondingDental MaterialsDental PellicleHumansSalivary Proteins and PeptidesStreptococcus mutansToothTooth DemineralizationComposite ResinsDental MaterialsSalivary Proteins and Peptidesbiofilmdentin bonding agentsesterasesgp340methacrylateStreptococcus mutans

Identifiers

PMID25190266
PMCPMC4237635
OpenAlexW2029454447

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.