ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2021
Microtensile Bond Strength of Etch-and-Rinse Adhesives in Different Hydroabrasion Conditionings.
Article in International journal of dentistry, 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.
- Air Particle Abrasion in Dentistry: An Overview of Effects on Dentin Adhesion and Bond Strength.Dentistry journal · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to in vitro evaluate the effect of dentin conditioning with hydroabrasion on the microtensile bond strengths of three adhesive systems, compared to the standard etch-and-rinse technique. Sixty extracted human third molars were collected, and their midcoronal occlusal dentin was used for the microtensile bond strength test. Teeth were randomly assigned to three groups according to the adhesive system used: ExciTE F DSC, ENA Bond, and Scotchbond Universal. Specimens from each group were further divided into four subgroups: control specimens were treated with standard adhesive procedures; hydroabraded (HA) specimens were subjected to preventive hydroabrasion with three different intensity levels. After bonding procedures, composite crowns were incrementally built up. After thermocycling, specimens were subsequently sectioned into 1 × 1 mm sticks, and microtensile bond strengths were measured. Data were statistically analyzed. Failure mode analysis was performed. There were no significant differences in terms of bond strength between standard adhesion protocols and adhesion with HA preconditionings. On the other hand, the type of adhesive used had a significant effect on the tensile bond strength. Subgroups treated with hydroabrasion at higher intensity showed a slightly increased frequency of cohesive fractures. In conclusion, hydroabrasion can be used for dentin cavity preparation or finishing, since it does not seem to affect the bonding effectiveness.
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.