ArticleInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry
Comparative Fluoride Ion Release Pre and Postrecharge Situations among Three Different Pediatric Dental Restorative Materials: An
Article in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Measurement of Fluoride Ion Release From Restorative Material Using an Ion-Selective Electrode and Ultraviolet-Visible Light Spectrophotometer.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the initial fluoride (F) release and rerelease after recharge of three pediatric dental restorative materials when aged in artificial saliva (M1) and deionized water (M2). Materials and methods: A total of 30 disks, 10 disks of each restorative material R1: Jen Rainbow, Jen Dent Ukraine; R2: Tetric® N-Flow, Ivoclar Vivadent, and R3: resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) (Fuji II LC- GC Corporation) were fabricated and were tested for F dynamics in two different media, M1: artificial saliva, M2: deionized water group. The F initial release was measured on the 1st, 7th, 14th, 21st, and 30th day, and on the 31st day, acidulated phosphate F (APF) gel was applied and F rerelease was measured on the 31st, 37th, 44th, 51st, and 60th day using F ion-specific electrode (Orion). The result was statistically analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Results: Fluoride (F) ion release was significantly higher in deionized water than in artificial saliva (M1), and F ion rerelease (after recharge) was significantly higher in artificial saliva (M1). Fuji-II LC demonstrated a significantly ( Conclusion: All the tested restorative materials exhibited optimum F release (0.024 ppm, that is, the range to prevent newer carious lesions) in both the pre and postrecharge conditions. Even though Fuji-II LC demonstrated significantly better F dynamics in the tested scenarios, Tetric® N-Flow has the additional advantage of improved mechanical retentive and esthetic properties along with the optimum F release in pre and postrecharge scenarios. How to cite this article: Mathias MR, Rathi N, Bendgude VD,
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.