ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2020
Experimental study of brackets adhesion with a novel enamel-protective material compared with conventional etching.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2020. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of a cold atmospheric plasma device utilizing ambient air on bracket bonding to human enamel and surface roughness after debonding.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets after adding silver nanoparticles to a nano-bond adhesive at different thermal cycles and cyclic loading- AnJournal of orthodontic science · 2022Article
- A remineralizing orthodontic etchant that utilizes calcium phosphate ion clusters.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionA reliable adhesion between fixed devices and dental surfaces is a key factor for the clinical success of any orthodontic treatment. Adhesion preparation is associated with damages related to abrasive cleaning, enamel structure defacing caused by etching, enamel loss when removing resin remnants at orthodontic treatment finishing stage or when conditioning surface for adhesive failure and fractures at bracket removal.
aimThe objective of this study was to compare the shear bond strength of metallic brackets to enamel adhered with a novel non-damaging and remineralizing material for enamel versus the traditional 37% phosphoric acid etching. MATERIAL AND
methods75 Premolars collected from 15- to 40-years old healthy donors requiring extraction were collected. The teeth were then randomly divided into three groups (n = 25). One group was used for the experimental new method (EX), the second for the conventional phosphoric acid etching (PA) method and the third group was left without any treatment (NT). The metallic brackets were fixed with Transbond® XT adhesive and composite resin polymerized for 40 s with a halogen photocuring lamp. The shear bond strength was quantified by means of a universal testing machine at 1 mm/min crosshead speed and a load cell of 1 kN. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Tests of normality, adjustment of the data to a root square, a one-way ANOVA and Tukey tests were performed.
resultsStatistically significant differences between the NT (1.4 MPa), PA (32.1 MPa) and EX (9.7 MPa) groups were observed.
conclusionsThe experimental material for conditioning human enamel induces calcium phosphates crystals on the enamel surface and improves the bond strength in comparison to the NT group.
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.