ArticleThe journal of adhesive dentistry2023
Can Carbodiimide (EDC) and Chitosan Cross-linking Agents Effect the Longevity of Fiberglass Posts Luted with Different Types of Composite Cements to Root Dentin?
Article in The journal of adhesive dentistry, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- 12 Months Results of Bond Strength and Endogenous Enzymatic Activity of Radicular Dentin Obturated With Bioceramic Sealer.The journal of adhesive dentistry · 2025Article
- Effect of Carbodiimide (EDC) on the Bond Strength Longevity of Epoxy Resin-based Endodontic Sealer to Root Dentin: An In-Vitro Study.The journal of adhesive dentistry · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the effect of carbodiimide (EDC) and chitosan (CHI) on the enzymatic activity (EA) and bond strength (BS) of different composite cements to root dentin. MATERIALS AND
methodsNinety (90) maxillary canines were sectioned, standardizing the length of the roots. The roots were endodontically treated, prepared, divided into 3 groups according to dentin treatment (distilled water [DW], CHI 0.2 wt%, or EDC 0.5M), and further subdivided into 3 subgroups according to composite cement (RelyX ARC [3M Oral Care], Panavia F 2.0 [Kuraray Noritaki], or RelyX U200 [3M Oral Care]). Of the slices obtained by sectioning, the most cervical of each third were subjected to a push-out test and the most apical were subjected to in-situ zymography. Half of the slices were analyzed immediately, and the other half after 6 months. The results were analyzed with ANOVA or the chi-squared test.
resultsRelyX ARC showed higher BS associated with CHI, while RelyX U200 showed higher BS associated with EDC (p = 0.044). For Panavia F 2.0, the treatment did not influence BS (p > 0.05). For the cervical and middle thirds, no differences were observed between the cements, while the apical third revealed higher BS for RelyX U200 (p < 0.001). The highest percentage of adhesive-to-dentin failures was observed for Panavia F 2.0. EDC showed the lowest percentage of adhesive-to-dentin failures. According to zymographic analysis, DW and CHI showed greater fluorescence for RelyX ARC, while EDC exhibited the lowest fluorescence of all cements (p > 0.05).
conclusionThe different mechanisms of action of solutions for pre-treatment of intraradicular dentin yielded different results depending on the adhesive used. EDC resulted in higher bond strength and higher enzyme inhibition for RelyX U200, while the treatment with chitosan resulted in higher bond strength and lower enzymatic activity for RelyX ARC. Although EDC and chitosan treatments did not influence the bond strength for Panavia F 2.0, both resulted in higher enzyme inhibition for this composite cement.
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.