Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30475892›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Analysis of the bond interface between self-adhesive resin cement to eroded dentin in vitro.

Mariana Dias Moda, Ticiane Cestari Fagundes, André Luiz Fraga Briso, Paulo Henrique Dos Santos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Effects of different concentrations of sodium hypochlorite on dentine adhesion and the recovery application of sodium erythorbate.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors.

Mariana Dias ModaDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Araçatuba Dental School, UNESP-São Paulo State University, Araçatuba, SP, Brazil.
Ticiane Cestari FagundesDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Araçatuba Dental School, UNESP-São Paulo State University, Araçatuba, SP, Brazil.
André Luiz Fraga BrisoDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Araçatuba Dental School, UNESP-São Paulo State University, Araçatuba, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-6126-1760
Paulo Henrique Dos SantosDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araçatuba Dental School, UNESP-São Paulo State University, Araçatuba, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-4100-5153

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bonding interface between a self-adhesive resin cement to in vitro eroded dentin. Seventy-two third molars were used and divided into two groups: sound dentin and in vitro eroded dentin. The in vitro erosion was performed following a demineralization protocol, in which the specimens were immersed in a demineralizing solution for 2 minutes per cycle and remineralizing solution for 10 minutes per cycle for 9 days. Both groups were submitted to four dentin surface treatments: control group (without any treatment), 2% chlorhexidine, 20% polyacrylic acid, and 0.1 M EDTA (n = 9). Blocks of resin-based composite were bonded with RelyX U200 self-adhesive resin cement applied on the pretreated dentin surfaces. The teeth were sectioned into beams (1mm2) and submitted to microtensile bond strength testing to evaluate the bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement to dentin after 24 hours and 8 months of immersion in artificial saliva. Three specimens of each group were longitudinally cut and evaluated using confocal laser scanning microscopy to analyze the dentin/cement interface. Eroded dentin showed higher bond strength values when compared to sound dentin for the 2% chlorhexidine group (p = 0.03), 24 hours after adhesion. When considering eroded dentin, the 0.1M EDTA group showed higher bond strength values with a statistically significant difference only for the control group (p = 0.002). After 8 months of storage, the present results showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two substrates for all experimental groups (p>0.05). Analysis of the microscopy confocal showed different types of treatments performed on dentin generally increased tags formation when compared to the control group. The eroded dentin showed a significant increase in density and depth of resinous tags when compared to sound dentin. The storage of samples for 8 months seems to have not caused significant degradation of the adhesive interface.

Indexed as

CementationDentinResin CementsTooth DemineralizationAcrylic ResinsChlorhexidineDental Stress AnalysisEdetic AcidEquipment Failure AnalysisHumansIn Vitro TechniquesMicroscopy, ConfocalMolar, ThirdTensile StrengthAcrylic ResinsAdhesive cementcarbopol 940ChlorhexidineDemineralized Dentin MatrixEdetic AcidRelyX U200Resin Cements

Identifiers

PMID30475892
PMCPMC6258132

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.