ArticleThe journal of adhesive dentistry2022
The Ability of Two Chewing Simulation Devices in Emulating the Clinical Deterioration of Anterior Composite Restorations in Severely Worn Teeth.
Article in The journal of adhesive dentistry, 2022. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- An in vitro evaluation of the fatigue behavior of resin composite materials as part of a translational research cycle.Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials · 2024Article
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
purposeThis study investigated the ability of two chewing simulation devices to emulate in vitro the clinical deterioration observed in anterior composite restorations in severe tooth-wear patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsAdvanced tooth wear was simulated in bovine incisors, which were restored with palatal and buccal direct composite veneer restorations. The incisal edges of restorations were subjected to 960K cycles of either compressive loading (Biocycle-V2; 125 N at 2 Hz) or wear and mechanical loading (Rub and Roll; 30 N at 20 rpm). Surface degradation was rated using FDI scores to compare the chewing devices (Fisher's test, a = 0.05). Topography and deterioration of restorations was analyzed using SEM. The ability to emulate the deterioration was investigated by comparing the surface degradation observed in vitro with the clinical degradation observed in restorations placed in severe tooth-wear patients after 3.5 years.
resultsDistinct degradation patterns were observed between the simulation devices: Biocycle-V2 generated deterioration that was not comparable to the clinical situation, including contact damage, minor wear, and localized roughening. The degradation caused by Rub and Roll was more similar to the in vivo situation, including wear facets, chipping, delamination, staining, and marginal ditching. The FDI scores were different between the chewing devices for surface/marginal staining, material/retention, and marginal adaptation (p = 0.003). SEM analysis showed microcracking at the interface between composite layers at the incisal edges.
conclusionsThe Rub and Roll chewing device was able to emulate the clinical deterioration observed in anterior restorations in severe tooth-wear patients and thus may be used as an oral-cavity simulation method, contributing to translational research.
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.