ArticleBrazilian dental journal2024
Surface treatments of the zirconia-reinforced lithium disilicate ceramic in the adhesion to the resin cement.
Article in Brazilian dental journal, 2024. 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.
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 at 1 institution in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study verified the effect of surface treatments of the zirconia-reinforced lithium disilicate ceramic bonded to resin cement. Ceramic blocks were divided according to treatments (n=10): FA+SRX (Fluoric acid + silane RX), FA+MDP (Fluoric acid + MDP), FA+SCF+MDP (Fluoric acid + silane CF + MDP), FA+MEP (Fluoric acid + MEP), and MEP (Self-etch primer). Resin cement cylinders were made in the ceramic blocks, photoactivated with 1,200 mW/cm² for 40s, stored in water at 37°C for 24h, and evaluated by the microshear strength test, optical failure descriptive analysis (%), surface characterization (SEM) and contact angle (Goniometer). Other samples were submitted to 10,000 thermocycles between 5°C and 55°C. Bond strength data were submitted to two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test. Contact angle to one-way ANOVA and Games-Howell's test (5%). At 24h, MEP showed higher bond strength, and FA+SRX the lower. FA+MDP and FA+SCF+MDP showed similar values and FA+MEP was intermediate. After thermocycling, FA+SCF+MDP, FA+MEP, and MEP showed higher values, and FA+SRX the lower while FA+MDP was intermediate. When the periods were compared, FA+MDP, FA+SCF+MDP, FA+MEP, and MEP showed higher values for 24h while FA+SRX was similar. SEM showed retentive surface and crystal exposure when treated with FA+SCF+MDP. The less retentive surface was obtained with MEP, and the other treatments promoted intermediate irregularities. In conclusion, surface treatment and thermocycling promoted different values of adhesive strength and contact angle in a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic. Failures were predominantly adhesive, and the ceramic surface was characterized by different levels of roughness and selective exposure of crystals.
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.