ArticleClinical oral investigations2016
TiF4 improves microtensile bond strength to dentin when using an adhesive system regardless of primer/bond application timing and method.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bonding durability and remineralizing efficiency of orthodontic adhesive containing titanium tetrafluoride: an invitro study.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Inhibition of demineralization around the enamel-dentin/restoration interface after dentin pretreatment with TiF4 and self-etching adhesive systems.Clinical oral investigations · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study evaluated the bond strength of a two-step conventional adhesive system to dentin pretreated with 2.5 % titanium tetrafluoride (TiF(4)) according to application timing (before or after acid conditioning) and primer/adhesive application method (active or passive). MATERIALS AND
methodsDentin surfaces were randomly treated with different adhesive procedures (n = 6): etching with phosphoric acid (PA) + primer/adhesive (Adper Single Bond 2/3M ESPE) actively applied; PA + primer/adhesive passively applied; TiF(4) before PA + primer/adhesive actively applied; TiF(4) before PA + primer/adhesive passively applied; TiF(4) after PA + primer/adhesive actively applied; and TiF(4) after PA + primer/adhesive passively applied. A composite block was built onto the tooth, which was sectioned into sticks (adhesive area of approximately 1 mm(2)). Microtensile bond strength tests and the failure mode were determined.
resultsTwo-way ANOVA revealed no significant interaction between TiF(4) application timing and primer/adhesive application method (p = 0.184). The use of TiF(4), before or after PA significantly increased bond strength values (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in bond strength values when using TiF4 before or after PA. The primer/adhesive application method had no influence on bond strength, regardless of whether TiF(4) was used (p = 0.906). Failure mode was predominantly adhesive.
conclusionsThe use of TiF(4) promoted higher immediate bond strength to dentin. The conventional adhesive system may be applied either actively or passively, regardless of TiF(4) application timing. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Pretreatment with TiF(4) increased bond strength in a conventional two-step adhesive system to dentin, regardless of the primer/adhesive application method and the timing of dentin pretreatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26025391What 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.