ArticleLasers in medical science2023
Comparative evaluation of effect of chlorhexidine application on dentin bond strength with two different adhesives after ER, CR: YSGG phototherapy: an in vitro study.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical effectiveness of Er, Cr: YSGG laser compared with conventional rotary instrumentation for caries removal in primary teeth: a randomized split-mouth clinical trial.Lasers in medical science · 2026Trial
- Impact of acid and laser etching of enamel on microleakage in different adhesive systems.Lasers in medical science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the efficacy of phototherapy with an Er, Cr:YSGG laser on the bond strength of dentin using two different adhesive systems after chlorhexidine (CHX) application. Twenty-four non-carious human molar teeth were separated into three main groups: negative control Group A (Group A), CHX and phototherapy with an Er, Cr:YSGG laser (Group PC), and CHX with conventional diamond bur (no phototherapy) (Group C). These groups were divided into two subgroups based on adhesives: Clearfil Universal Quick Bond and Clearfil SE Bond. To evaluate the microtensile bond strength, the occlusal enamel surfaces of the teeth were removed with a low-speed, water-cooled diamond bur to expose hard dentin tissue. The teeth within Group PC were treated with Er, Cr:YSGG phototherapy. The surfaces were then disinfected with 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate. Subgroups were applied according to the manufacturer's instructions using the adhesive systems mentioned above. Following adhesive application, the teeth were restored with composite resin. A microtensile bond strength test was performed on the test sticks obtained from the teeth using a universal test device. Data were analyzed using variance analysis (ANOVA) at a significance level of p < 0.05. Among all groups, the highest bond strength was achieved with Clearfil SE Bond with CHX + phototherapy (45.6 ± 4.2), while the lowest was achieved with Clearfil Universal Quick Bond without phototherapy (control group) (27.0 ± 6.7) (p < 0.05). Phototherapy with Er, Cr: YSGG following chlorhexidine application enhanced the bond strength of both the bond systems (p < 0.05).
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.