Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38523959›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Comparative Evaluation of Luting Efficacy Between a Dual-Cure and Light-Cure Resin Cement on Its Application on Root Surface Indirect Restorations: An In Vitro Study.

Twinkle Francis, Karthickraj S M

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Twinkle FrancisDepartment of Periodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, IND.
Karthickraj S MDepartment of Periodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim The aim is to evaluate the degree of dye penetration between a dual-cure and conventional resin cement on its application on the root surface indirect restorations to provide a reference for clinical choice. Materials and methods Ten freshly extracted human maxillary central anteriors were selected and randomly divided into two groups of five each. Teeth were prepared for veneer restoration, and veneers were luted using two groups of cements Calibra veneer cement and Fusion Ultra D/C cement. After they were immersed in methylene blue dye solution for 24 h, the specimens were then sectioned buccolingual into three halves in a parallel vertical plane and measured dye penetration using a stereomicroscope (Zeiss). The data collected was recorded by the dye penetration index (0-4) and statistically analyzed using the IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24 (Released 2016; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, United States). Results It is evident that group 1 (Calibra veneer cement) showed the lowest mean score of 0.43 mm and group 2 (Fusion Ultra D/C) showed a highest mean score of 0.72 mm. Overall, when the two groups were compared for microleakage using SPSS, there was a significant difference among the groups. Conclusion It was determined that both the resin cements evaluated in this study showed microleakage to some level given the limits of the investigation and the findings. To evaluate the dye penetration of microleakage, the Calibra veneer resin cement showed a better marginal adaptability for veneer restoration. Further investigations with broader methodology and more clinical simulation are needed to evaluate other resin cements available for root surface indirect restorations to be analyzed for prospective clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

dentalhealthmicroleakageresin cementroot surfacestereomicroscopeveneers

Identifiers

PMID38523959
PMCPMC10960590

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.