Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35629643›Full record

ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022

In Vitro Study of Laser-Assisted Prefabricated Ceramic Crown Debonding as Compared to Traditional Rotary Instrument Removal.

Janina Golob Deeb, Andrew Crowell, Kristen H Richey, Sompop Bencharit, Caroline K Carrico, Tiffany L Williams, Kinga Grzech-Leśniak

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Is high-power laser irradiation a time efficient method to debond zirconia restorations?Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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 1 institution in 2 countries.

Janina Golob DeebDepartment of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.
Andrew CrowellDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.
Kristen H RicheyDepartment of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3445-6976
Sompop BencharitDepartment of Oral and Craniofacial Molecular Biology, Philips Institute for Oral Health Research, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1209-9362
Caroline K CarricoDepartment of Dental Public Health and Policy, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.
Tiffany L WilliamsDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.
Kinga Grzech-LeśniakDepartment of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5700-4577
Virginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study compared the laser and rotary removals of prefabricated zirconia crowns in primary anterior and permanent posterior teeth. Sixty-two extracted teeth were prepared for prefabricated zirconia crowns cemented with resin-modified glass-ionomer cement. Specimens underwent crown removals by a rotary handpiece, or erbium, chromium: yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG) laser. Pulpal temperatures, removal times, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) examinations were compared. The average crown removal time for rotary and laser methods was 80.9 ± 19.36 s and 353.3 ± 110.6 s, respectively, for anterior primary teeth; and 114.2 ± 32.1 s and 288.5 ± 76.1 s, respectively, for posterior teeth (p < 0.001). The maximum temperature for the rotary and laser groups was 22.2 ± 8.5 °C and 27.7 ± 1.6 °C for anterior teeth, respectively (p < 0.001); and 21.8 ± 0.77 °C and 25.8 ± 0.85 °C for the posterior teeth, respectively (p < 0.001). More open dentinal tubules appeared in the rotary than the laser group. The rotary handpiece removal method may be more efficient than the laser with lower pulpal temperature changes. However, the laser method does not create noticeable tooth or crown structural damage compared to the rotary method.

Indexed as

crownEr,Cr:YSGGlaserlaser debondingremovalzirconia

Identifiers

PMID35629643
PMCPMC9143968
OpenAlexW4280507435

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.