ArticleDental research journal
Volume fraction and location of voids and gaps in ultraconservative restorations by X-ray computed micro-tomography.
Article in Dental research journal. 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.
- Types of Resin Composite and Filling Techniques: How They Affect Internal Void Volume and Compressive Strength.Polymers · 2026Article
- Quantification of porosity in composite resins delivered by injectable syringes using X-ray microtomography.Biomaterial investigations in dentistry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVolume fraction (Vf) and location of internal voids and gaps in relation to material type and cavity dimensions in ultraconservative restorations were investigated in this study. MATERIALS AND
methodsForty-eight round cavities of 1.3 mm mean diameter and 2.6 mm mean depth were made on buccal and lingual surfaces of recently extracted human teeth. These were filled and thermocycled with two low viscosity composites (AeliteFlo LV [AF], PermaFlo [PF]), one high viscosity composite (Aelite aesthetic enamel [AA]) and one glass-ionomer (GCFuji IX GP). X-ray microtomography, following a specific procedure, was applied to all cavities before and after their restoration, using SkyScan-1072 microtomographer. Vf percent (Vf%) and location of voids and gaps were recorded and analysed statistically at a = 0.05. Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric analysis of variance, post-hoc analysis, Mann-Whitney test, Spearman's correlation analysis were used to analyze data.
resultsCavities filled with AF and PF showed significantly lower Vf % of voids and gaps than all other restorations (P < 0.05). Only for the cavities filled with AA, cavity width and depth was significantly correlated with Vf % (P < 0.05). 50-75% of the filled cavities contained internal voids regardless of the restorative material (P > 0.05). The proportion of cavities with gaps at the bottom and side walls was lower in those filled with AF and PF (P < 0.05).
conclusionCavities filled with low viscosity composites presented the lowest amount of internal voids and gaps. Glass-ionomer and high viscosity composite restorative materials showed the highest amount of interfacial gaps. Only in the high viscosity composite restorations the amount of voids and gaps correlated with the cavity depth, width and volume.
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.