Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36616585›Full record

ArticlePolymers2023

The Influence on Fracture Resistance of Different Composite Resins and Prefabricated Posts to Restore Endodontically Treated Teeth.

Saulo Pamato, Weber Adad Ricci, Milton Carlos Kuga, Eliane Cristina Gulin de Oliveira, João Carlos Silos Moraes, Marcus Vinicius Reis Só, Tamara Carolina Trevisan, Newton Fahl Júnior, Jefferson Ricardo Pereira

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polymers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Saulo PamatoPost-Graduate Program of Health Sciences, University of Southern Santa Catarina (UNISUL), Tubarão 89636-000, Brazil.
Weber Adad RicciDepartment of Restorative Dentistry (FOAR), School of Dentistry at Araraquara, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara 01049-010, Brazil.
Milton Carlos KugaDepartment of Restorative Dentistry (FOAR), School of Dentistry at Araraquara, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara 01049-010, Brazil.
Eliane Cristina Gulin de OliveiraDepartment of Restorative Dentistry (FOAR), School of Dentistry at Araraquara, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara 01049-010, Brazil.
João Carlos Silos MoraesDepartment of Physics and Chemistry, School of Natural Sciences and Engineering, São Paulo State University (UNESP), 56 Brasil Avenue, Ilha Solteira 15385-000, Brazil.
Marcus Vinicius Reis SóDepartment of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, University Federal of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre 90000-000, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-1393-5900
Tamara Carolina TrevisanDepartment of Restorative Dentistry (FOAR), School of Dentistry at Araraquara, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara 01049-010, Brazil.
Newton Fahl JúniorPrivate Practice, Curitiba 59950-000, Brazil.
Jefferson Ricardo PereiraPost-Graduate Program of Health Sciences, University of Southern Santa Catarina (UNISUL), Tubarão 89636-000, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-5663-3710

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent formulations of resin-based composites have incorporated different combinations of materials. However, the mechanical and bonding behavior of these materials with intraradicular posts are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of light-cure and dual-cure resin composite posts on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated teeth. Materials and Methods: Ninety extracted human upper canines were selected and randomly divided into nine groups (n=10): (G1) endodontically treated teeth without endodontic posts; (G2) glass-fiber post cemented with glass-ionomer cement; (G3) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Rebilda DC); (G4) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Cosmecore); (G5) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Bis-Core); (G6) endodontic post by light-cure composite resin; (G7) glass-fiber post customized with flowable composite resin; (G8) glass-fiber post cemented with light-cure composite resin; (G9) glass-fiber post cemented with self-adhesive resin cement. After the post insertion, all specimens were subjected to mechanical (250,000 cycles) and thermocycling (6000 cycles, 5 °C/55 °C) and immediate loading at 45 degrees in a universal testing machine until fracture. The data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and multiple comparisons using the Fisher LSD Method (p < 0 05). Results: The mean failure loads (±SD) for the groups ranged from 100.7 ± 22.6 N to 221.9 ± 48.9 N. The G1 group (without endodontic posts) had a higher fracture strength than all experimental groups (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Within the limitations, the light- and dual-cure post technique did not present lower fracture resistance values as compared to the conventional glass-fiber post.

Indexed as

endodontically treated teethfiber postfracture resistancepost-endodontic restorationresin material

Identifiers

PMID36616585
PMCPMC9823756

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.