Trial reportClinical oral investigations2016
Four-year randomized clinical trial of oxalic acid pretreatment in restorations of non-carious cervical lesions.
Trial report 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 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.
- Effect of 940 nm laser diode irradiation prior to bonding procedure on postoperative sensitivity following class II composite restorations: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial.Lasers in medical science · 2021Trial
- Assessing the effect of dentin pre-treatment techniques on the longevity of Non-Carious Cervical Lesions (NCCLs) restorations: A scoping review.The Japanese dental science review · 2026Review
- Investigations on the adhesion of new composites for restoring cervical lesions using energy dispersive X-ray analysis and scanning electron microscopy.Scientific reports · 2019Article
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
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of oxalic acid (BisBlock) on restorations of non-carious cervical lesions. MATERIALS AND
methodsOne operator placed 90 restorations randomly divided into two groups in 20 patients under cotton rolls isolation: Control Group-two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive technique; and Experimental Group-two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive technique with oxalic acid pretreatment after acid-etched dentin. The restorative adhesive system used was XP Bond/Durafill. The restorations were directly assessed by two independent examiners, using the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria at the baseline and 4 years. Data were statistically analyzed using the Fisher and McNemar tests (p < 0.05).
resultsFifteen patients (75%) were available for recall after 4 years. The McNemar test detected significant differences within the Experimental Group between the baseline and 4-year evaluations for retention (p < 0.05). For the Control Group, there was no significant difference (p > 0.05) between the periods. The Fisher test showed no statistically significant difference between the groups for all other criteria (p > 0.05).
conclusionAfter 4 years of service, the use of oxalic acid did not influence the clinical performance of restorations when it was used under composite resin restorations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26174079What 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.