ArticleBiomaterials advances2025
Synergistic effects of bacteria, enzymes, and cyclic mechanical stresses on the bond strength of composite restorations.
Article in Biomaterials advances, 2025. 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.
- Study on a Novel Dental Composite Resin with Fluorinated Polyurethane Monomer and Modified Polyether Ether Ketone Fillers.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Predicting how tooth and dental material bonds perform in the mouth requires a deep understanding of degrading factors. Yet, this understanding is incomplete, leading to significant uncertainties in designing and evaluating new dental adhesives. The durability of dental bonding interfaces in the oral microenvironment is compromised by bacterial acids, salivary enzymes, and masticatory fatigue. These factors degrade the bond between dental resins and tooth surfaces, making the strength of these bonds difficult to predict. Traditionally studied separately, a combined kinetic analysis of these interactions could enhance our understanding and improvement of dental adhesive durability. To address this issue, we developed and validated an original model to evaluate the bond strength of dental restorations using realistic environments that consider the different mechanical, chemical, and biological degradative challenges working simultaneously: bacteria, salivary esterases, and cyclic loading. We herein describe a comprehensive investigation on dissociating the factors that degrade the bond strength of dental restorations. Our results showed that cariogenic bacteria are the number one factor contributing to the degradation of the bonded interface, followed by cyclic loading and salivary esterases. When tested in combinatorial mode, negative and positive synergies towards the degradation of the interface were observed. Masticatory loads (i.e., cycling loading) enhanced the lactic acid bacterial production and the area occupied by the biofilm at the bonding interface, resulting in more damage at the interface and a reduction of 73 % in bond strength compared to no-degraded samples. Salivary enzymes also produced bond degradation caused by changes in the chemical composition of the resin/adhesive. However, the degradation rates are slowed compared to the bacteria and cyclic loading. These results demonstrate that our synergetic model could guide the design of new dental adhesives for biological applications without laborious trial-and-error experimentation.
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.