ArticleEuropean archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry2019
Bioactive glass ceramic can improve the bond strength of sealant/enamel?
Article in European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Microtensile Bond Strength of Bioactive Pit and Fissure Sealants Bonded to Primary and Permanent Teeth.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimEvaluate the influence of enamel pre-treatment using Biosilicate, associated or not to other treatments; on the bond strength (BS) of pit-and-fissure sealant, with or without saliva contamination.
methodsNinety slices (4 mm × 4 mm) were obtained from 30 bovine incisors. Each slice was embedded in acrylic resin with their buccal surface exposed and polished to obtain a flat enamel surface. Half of them were contaminated with human saliva. All specimens were randomly divided into five groups (n = 9) according to the surface pre-treatment tested: acid etching (AE); AE + Biosilicate (B); AE + B + total-etch adhesive (Ad); Biosilicate; control (no treatment). Then, a 1 mm layer of sealant (Clinpro XT Varnish, 3M ESPE) was applied; and to provide support, a composite resin (Opallis, FGM) block was built up over it. Samples were thermocycled (500 cycles/5-55 °C) and sectioned obtaining sticks (1 × 1 × 10 mm) for microtensile BS testing (0.5 mm/min). Data were analysed with two-way ANOVA, Bonferroni test, p < 0.05. Failure patterns were evaluated using a stereomicroscope.
resultsThere was no difference among contaminated and non-contaminated groups, and between non-contaminated groups (p > 0.05). When contaminated, AE + B + Ad Group showed the highest BS values, differing (p < 0.05) from B Group and Control; similar between them (p > 0.05). Cohesive fractures were found in AE + B + Ad Group, submitted or not to contamination.
conclusionsSince a surface pre-treatment was used, whether Biosilicate was applied or not, the sealant/enamel BS was the same in saliva-contaminated or non-contaminated enamel.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30903613What 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.