ArticleCureus2022
Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage in Class II Restorations Using Open- and Closed-Sandwich Techniques With Zirconomer as an Intermediate Material: An In-Vitro Study.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cariogenic Risk Modifies the Effect of Marginal Adaptation on Caries Adjacent to Posterior Composite Restorations: A Stratified Multivariate Analysis.Clinics and practice · 2026Article
- Comparison of microleakage in restorative materials used for deep cervical margin elevation: a systematic review.Biomaterial investigations in dentistry · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim To evaluate and compare the microleakage In class II restorations using open- and closed-sandwich techniques with zirconomer as an intermediate material. Material and method Twenty-six non-carious mandibular first molars were selected and randomly divided into two groups (groups 1 and 2 where n=13). A standardized Class II preparation was made with the cervical margin 1 mm below the cementum-enamel junction. Samples of group 1 were restored using the open-sandwich technique and samples of group 2 with the close-sandwich technique, and zirconomer was used as an intermediate restorative material. Following that, the restorations underwent 200 heat cycles with dwell times of 20 seconds at 5°C and 55°C. Dye penetration and scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis using the replica approach were used to assess adaptation at the cervical margin. The data were statistically analyzed using the Paired T-test (
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.