Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34491449›Full record

Trial reportClinical oral investigations2022

Early failures when using three different adhesively retained core build-up materials-a randomized controlled trial.

Andreas Zenthöfer, Justo Lorenzo Bermejo, Wolfgang Bömicke, Cornelia Frese, Rumeysa Gülmez, Peter Rammelsberg, Brigitte Ohlmann

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Andreas ZenthöferDepartment of Prosthodontics, Dental School, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. andreas.zenthoefer@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4563-5646
Justo Lorenzo BermejoInstitute of Medical Biometry, University of Heidelberg, INF 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Wolfgang BömickeDepartment of Prosthodontics, Dental School, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Cornelia FreseDepartment of Operative Dentistry, Dental School, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Rumeysa GülmezDepartment of Prosthodontics, Dental School, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Peter RammelsbergDepartment of Prosthodontics, Dental School, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Brigitte OhlmannDepartment of Prosthodontics, Dental School, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DEZimmer Biomet (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare the failure rates for three different adhesively retained core build-up composites up to the incorporation of a permanent fixed dental prosthesis (FDP), and to identify potential failure risk factors. MATERIAL AND

methodsA randomized controlled trial of 300 participants in need of a core build-up to restore a vital abutment tooth before prosthetic treatment was conducted. Participants were assigned by stratified block randomization to one of three study groups: Rebilda DC (RDC), Clearfil DC Core (CDC), or Multicore Flow (MF). Test teeth were prepared by use of the respective manufacturer's adhesive system. The total-etch technique was used for RDC and MF, and the self-etch technique for CDC. Participants were treated by dentists (n = 150) or dental students (n = 150). Failure rates of core build-ups before incorporation of FDPs were investigated using univariate and multiple logistic regression.

resultsThe overall failure rate was 8% (n = 23). Rate differences between the three investigated groups did not reach statistical significance (p > 0.05). The mean time between placement of core build-ups and placement of fixed dental prostheses was 12.2 (SD: 14.2) weeks. Conversely, larger cavities (> 3 surfaces) and treatment by dental students were independently associated with an increased failure risk (p < 0.05).

conclusionsThe main risk factors for early failure seem to be the size of the core build-up and clinical experience of the operator, whereas failure rates of core build-up materials combined with a self-etch approach seem to be similar to the rates of materials combined with the total-etch technique. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This research article should give clinicians an impression of the short-term performance of different adhesively retained core build-ups using different adhesive techniques/materials. Moreover, predominant influencing factors for the success or failure should be pictured.

Indexed as

Post and Core TechniqueDental CementsDental Restoration FailureHumansResin CementsDental CementsResin CementsAdhesiveClinicalCore build-upDental prosthesesFailureRCT

Identifiers

PMID34491449
PMCPMC8816765
OpenAlexW3198759540

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.