Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26966710›Full record

ArticleJournal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran)2016

A Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Two Low-Shrinkage Composites with a Conventional Resin Composite: an In Vitro Assessment.

Maryam Tavangar, Reza Tayefeh Davalloo, Farideh Darabi, Mahsa Karambin, Reza Kazemi

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

Article in Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Maryam TavangarDept. of Operative and Esthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
Reza Tayefeh DavallooDept. of Operative and Esthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
Farideh DarabiDept. of Operative and Esthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
Mahsa KarambinDentist, Rasht, Iran.
Reza KazemiDept. of Reconstructive Sciences, University of Connecticut Health Center, School of Dental Medicine, Farmington, USA.
Islamic Azad University Rasht Branch · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

statement of the problemPolymerization shrinkage stress in composite restorations may lead to microleakage. Clinical methods such as using low-shrinkage composites have been suggested to overcome this problem; however, there are controversies about their efficiency in decreasing the microleakage. PURPOSE: This in vitro study was conducted to compare the microleakage of two low-shrinkage resin composites with a conventional one. MATERIALS AND

methodFifty class V cavities of 2.5×3×2 mm (depth× length× width) were prepared in the buccal surfaces of intact bovine incisor teeth with the incisal margin on the enamel and gingival margin on the cementum. The teeth were randomly divided into 5 groups. In group 1, Clearfil APX (conventional) with SE Bond was used in 2 layers (Kuraray; Japan). In group 2, GC Kalore (low -shrinkage) with GC UniFil Bond was applied in one layer (GC Company). In group 3, the material of group 2 was applied in two layers. In group 4, FiltekP90 (low -shrinkage) with P90 System adhesive was applied in one layer (3M ESPE). In group 5, the materials of group 4 were applied in two layers. The samples were thermocycled and immersed in 0.5% fuchsin solution for 24h. The restorations were sectioned in buccolingual direction. Then they were evaluated for microleakage by using a stereomicroscope and scored as 0, 1, 2, and 3 and then Kruskal-Wallis test was used (p< 0.05).

resultsThe groups were not significantly different regarding the microleakage in the coronal and cervical margins (p< 0.423 and p< 0.212, respectively); however, the Filtek P90 yielded the best results. In all groups, except group 5 (p= 0.018), the cervical margins had greater microleakage than the coronal margins.

conclusionThe results suggested that low-shrinkage resin composites may not reduce the marginal microleakage. The proper use of conventional resin composites may offer comparable clinical results.

Indexed as

Dental BondingMicroleakageResin Composites

Identifiers

PMID26966710
PMCPMC4771054
OpenAlexW2764554607

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.