Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38418863›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2024

3-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the performance of posterior composite restorations lined with ion-releasing materials.

Basma Ahmed, Ramy Ahmed Wafaie, Hamdi H Hamama, Salah Hasab Mahmoud

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05470959 (Bioactive Ionic Resin Composite Versus Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cavity Liners), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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.

NCT05470959 nacompletednot on this map

Bioactive Ionic Resin Composite Versus Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cavity Liners: 2-Year Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorMansoura UniversityRan2019 to 2021Enrolled20ConditionsDental CariesArmsACTIVA bioactive, Riva LC
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Clinical Performance of Bulk-Fill Versus Incremental Composite Placement Approaches in Vital Posterior Teeth: A 24 Months Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Basma AhmedConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Delta University for Science and Technology, Gamasa, Egypt.
Ramy Ahmed WafaieConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Delta University for Science and Technology, Gamasa, Egypt.
Hamdi H HamamaConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, 35516, Egypt. hamdy_hosny@mans.edu.eg.
Salah Hasab MahmoudConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, 35516, Egypt.
Delta University for Science and Technology · EGMansoura University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To evaluate the impact of using ion-releasing liners on the 3-year clinical performance of posterior resin composite restorations after selective caries excavation with polymer burs. 20 patients were enrolled in this trial. Each patient had two deep carious lesions, one on each side of the mouth. After selective caries removal using polymer bur (PolyBur P1, Komet, Brasseler GmbH Co. KG, Lemgo, Germany), cavities were lined with bioactive ionic resin composite (Activa Bioactive Base/Liner, Pulpdent, Watertown, MA, USA) or resin-modified glass ionomer liner (Riva Light Cure, SDI, Bayswater, Victoria, Australia). All cavities were then restored with nanofilled resin composite (Filtek Z350XT, 3M Oral Care, St. Paul, MN, USA). All the tested materials were placed according to the manufacturers' instructions. Clinical evaluation was accomplished using World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria at baseline and after 6 months, 1, 2, and 3 years. Data were analyzed using Mann-whitney U and Friedman tests (p < 0.05). The success rates were 100% for all resin composite restorations either lined with ion-releasing resin composite or resin-modified glass ionomer liner. Mann-whitney U test revealed that there were no statistically significant differences between both ion-releasing lining material groups for all criteria during the follow-up periods (p > 0.05). Resin composite restorations showed acceptable clinical performance over 3 years either lined with bioactive ionic or resin-modified glass ionomer liners after selective caries excavation preserving pulp vitality. After the 3-year follow-up period, Activa Bioactive and Riva Light Cure liners were clinically effective and they exhibited with the overlying composite restorations successful clinical performance.Trial registration number: NCT05470959. Date of registration: 22/7/2022. Retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

Dental CariesResin CementsAcrylic ResinsComposite ResinsDental Restoration, PermanentHumansSilicon DioxideVictoriaAcrylic ResinsComposite Resinsglass ionomerResin CementsSilicon DioxideCavity linersClinical trialDeep cariesIon-releasingSelective caries removal

Identifiers

PMID38418863
PMCPMC10902344
OpenAlexW4392243169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.