ReviewRestorative dentistry & endodontics2022
Deep proximal margin rebuilding with direct esthetic restorations: a systematic review of marginal adaptation and bond strength.
Review in Restorative dentistry & endodontics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of thickness and base material in class II restorations with nanofilled composites: finite element study.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Do irrigation solutions effect bond strength of composite resin to deep margin elevation material? An in-vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Effect of surface treatment on glass ionomers in sandwich restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of laboratory studies.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2025Article
- Short dentin etching with universal adhesives: effect on bond strength and gingival margin adaptation.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Influence of curing mode and aging on the bonding performance of universal adhesives in coronal and root dentin.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Alternative Direct Restorative Materials for Dental Amalgam: A Concise Review Based on an FDI Policy Statement.International dental journal · 2024Review
- Comparison of the stress distribution in base materials and thicknesses in composite resin restorations.Heliyon · 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
This review aimed to characterize the effect of direct restorative material types and adhesive protocols on marginal adaptation and the bond strength of the interface between the material and the proximal dentin/cementum. An electronic search of 3 databases (the National Library of Medicine [MEDLINE/PubMed], Scopus, and ScienceDirect) was conducted. Studies were included if they evaluated marginal adaptation or bond strength tests for proximal restorations under the cementoenamel junction. Only 16 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. These studies presented a high degree of heterogeneity in terms of the materials used and the methodologies and evaluation criteria of each test; therefore, only a descriptive analysis could be conducted. The included studies were individually evaluated for the risk of bias following predetermined criteria. To summarize the results of the included studies, the type of restorative material affected the test results, whereas the use of different adhesive protocols had an insignificant effect on the results. It could be concluded that various categories of resin-based composites could be a suitable choice for clinicians to elevate proximal dentin/cementum margins, rather than the open sandwich technique with resin-modified glass ionomers. Despite challenges in bonding to proximal dentin/cementum margins, different adhesive protocols provided comparable outcomes.
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.