ArticleBMC oral health2022
The effects of amalgam contamination and different surface modifications on microleakage of dentin bonded to bulk fill composite when using different adhesive protocols.
Article in BMC oral health, 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.
- The effect of preprocedural mouthrinses against COVID-19 before acid etching on the microleakage of a resin-based sealant in permanent molars: AnJournal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the effect of amalgam contamination, different surface treatments, and adhesive protocols on dentin microleakage to bulk-fill composite resin material.
methodsForty teeth were fixed in (polyvinyl siloxane) PVS molds, and the Class II cavities were placed on mesial and distal aspects. Thirty teeth were restored by amalgam and thermocycled to 10,000 cycles (5 and 55 °C, 30-s dwell time). The rest were restored with Filtek one Bulk Fill composite without amalgam predecessor. Samples were divided into: G1 (dentin pretreated with 2% chlorhexidine gluconate), G2 (0.5 mm of dentin was removed), G3 (no surface modification), and G4 (control, where composite was bonded to sound dentin without amalgam predecessor.). Single Bond Universal Adhesive system was used to bond the composite material, by using the etch-and-rinse protocol in the mesial cavity preparation and self-etch protocol in the distal. Specimens underwent thermocycling for 5000 cycles, then embedded in silver nitrate and sectioned for stereomicroscope examination. Descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U test, and Kruskal-Wallis test were used to analyze the results at p < 0.05.
resultsThe highest microleakage score values (4.00) were found in the G2, and G4 in etch-and-rinse protocol. While the lowest scores were found in G2 when using self-etching protocol (1.5). Lower microleakage values were associated with the chlorhexidine treatment group for both adhesive protocols. No significant differences were found between amalgam contaminated and non-contaminated groups.
conclusionsAmalgam contamination did not affect microleakage. Self-etching adhesive protocol significantly reduced microleakage for all groups irrespective of the surface treatment. Chlorhexidine pretreatment improved microleakage for both adhesive protocols but had no significant effect.
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.