ArticleClinical oral investigations2021
Objective assessment of simulated non-carious cervical lesion by tridimensional digital scanning.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Efficacy of tunnel technique for treatment of gingival recession of upper adjacent teeth with noncarious cervical defect].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the use of 3D intraoral scanner/image analysis for the detection and monitoring of simulated non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) in vitro. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 288 NCCLs of different severities and simulated using a laboratorial model associating toothbrush stiffness (soft, medium, and hard) and toothpaste abrasivity (low, medium, high, and negative control) were analyzed. Dental impressions were taken from specimens before and after 35K and 65K brushing strokes, and then scanned with a CEREC Omnicam scanner. 3D models were analyzed for volumetric tooth loss. 3D optical profilometry was considered as the gold standard. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Fisher's PLSD tests (alpha = 0.05), and agreement between methods by using intraclass correlation coefficient.
resultsToothbrushes of hard and mid stiffness caused higher tooth loss than soft when associated with the highest abrasive, at 35K and 65K strokes (p < 0.001). Variation in slurry abrasivity led to differences in tooth loss (with control < low < medium < high, p < 0.0001) after both 35K and 65K strokes, regardless of the type of toothbrush used, except at 35K, wherein control = low (p = 0.55). 35K strokes caused less tooth loss than 65K for all abrasive slurries (p < 0.0001) except controls. The intraclass correlation coefficient for agreement between the test and gold standard methods was 0.85.
conclusionsAnalysis of 3D images from intraoral scanner could detect and monitor NCCL progression, although this ability was limited on incipient lesions. Overall good agreement was found between the test method and optical profilometry. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The suggested method may be applicable to detect and monitor NCCLs clinically.
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.