ArticleClinical oral investigations2023
A comparative evaluation of mechanical wear of adhesives used for bonded retainers that underwent brushing for 1 hour under 36 mm of linear action, using computer-aided 3D scan-an in vitro study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
objectivesThe aim of the present study was to comparatively evaluate the mechanical wear of adhesives used in bonded retainers. MATERIALS AND
methodsEighty mandibular acrylic teeth were included in the study that were divided into 4 different groups based upon the composite used. Each acrylic tooth was bonded with a retainer wire and composite of their respective group (Heliosit, Restofill, Tetric-N-flow, and Filtek Z350 XT). These bonded acrylic teeth were subjected to 3D scan in order to evaluate the volume and surface area of the composite. The 3D scans were recorded using MEDIT 3D scanner. After evaluating, the samples were subjected to brushing with the aid of a custom-made brushing simulator using a toothbrush with soft bristles and toothpaste slurry. The samples were subjected to 1 hr of brushing. These samples were again subjected to 3D scans to evaluate (post-test volume and surface area) and underwent statistical analysis.
resultsThe results showed the Heliosit group exhibited the highest mean volume (1.76 mm
conclusionAll the four composites underwent change in the mean surface area and volume after being subjected to brushing, suggesting that the composites routinely used for bonding fixed bonded lingual retainers are subjected to changes due to abrasion. The Heliosit group, which showed least filler loading among the 4 composites, exhibited least resistance to wear, whereas the Tetric-N-flow group which had highest filler loading among the composites exhibited highest resistance to wear. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The most crucial phase during orthodontic treatment is the retention phase. This phase is responsible for the long-term results of the treatment. The retainers that are placed in the oral cavity are subjected to changes due to oral environment, chemical changes, and mechanical changes. These changes have a direct effect on the retainers, which tend to alter their properties. Thus, the effects of these changes are to be studied thoroughly.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37587351What 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.