ArticleDental research journal2021
Bond strength and microleakage of different types of cements in stainless steel crown of primary molar teeth.
Article in Dental research journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Marginal Fit, Internal Adaptation, and Microleakage of Preformed Metal Crowns: Impact of Three Preparation Techniques and Three Ion-Releasing Cements.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the retention of prefabricated polyether ether ketone crowns compared to stainless steel crowns (an in vitro study).BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Bond Strength of Bioflx Crowns with Resinous and Nonresinous Luting Agents on Primary Teeth: AnInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2026Article
- Retention of Bioflx, Zirconia, and Stainless Steel crowns using two different luting cements in primary molars: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Retention of Pediatric BioFlx Crowns Versus Stainless Steel Crowns Using Different Types of Luting Cements: An In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparative Evaluation of the Bond Strength Between Bioflx, Stainless Steel Crowns, and Stainless Steel Bands Using Type 1 Glass Ionomer Cement and Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement as Luting Agents: AnInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2025Article
- Shear bond strength evaluation of new computer-aided design - computer-aided manufacturing chromium-cobalt alloy (Sintron) with two different types of cement: An in vitro study.Dental research journal · 2025Article
- Comparison of retention and fracture load of endocrowns made from zirconia and zirconium lithium silicate after aging: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- In vitro comparison of microleakage with two different techniques of placing stainless steel crowns on mandibular deciduous first molar teeth with decreased mesiodistal width.Journal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects · 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
backgroundThe margin of crown is a significant area for plaque accumulations. Therefore, the ability of the cement to seal the margin is very important. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the bond (retentive) strength, microleakage, and failure mode of four different types of cements in stainless steel crown (SSC) of primary molar teeth. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this experimental study, eighty extracted primary molar teeth were divided into two groups of forty teeth to test the microleakage and bond strength. The crowns were cemented according to the manufacturer guidelines with four cement types including self-cure glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, polycarboxylate, and resin cements. Stereomicroscope and universal testing machine were used to measure the microleakage and bond strength, respectively. For calculating the surface area of crowns, three-dimensional scanning was used. Furthermore, the failure mode was examined after the bond strength test. The cements surfaces and the tooth-cement interfaces were evaluated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The obtained values were analyzed using SPSS-23 software through Shapiro-Wilk and one-way analysis of variance tests. Means, standard deviations, medians, and interquartile ranges were calculated.
resultsSignificant differences between microleakage (
conclusionResin cement and resin-modified glass ionomer, respectively, showed superior properties and are recommended for use in SSCs of primary molar teeth.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34497693PMC8404568What 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.