ArticleBMC oral health2024
Immediate and delayed shear bond strength evaluation between root canal sealers and restorative materials: an experimental study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Influence of Calcium Silicate-Based Cement-Repaired Root Canals on Push-Out Bond Strength of Glass Fiber Posts: An In Vitro Study.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral calcium silicate-based sealers have recently emerged in endodontics. This study aimed to compare the immediate and delayed shear bond strength between the bioceramic and calcium hydroxide-based sealers and different resin-based restorative materials.
methodsOne hundred and twenty specimens with a 3-mm depth and a 3-mm diameter were prepared. They were evenly divided into two groups, the bioceramic sealer and calcium hydroxide-based sealer groups. Each primary group was subdivided into two subgroups based on the restorative material used; i.e., the flowable resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer subgroups. Moreover, each subgroup was further divided into the restoration process's timing: either immediately post-sealing or delayed after setting the sealers for seven days. The mode of failure was assessed by stereomicroscopic examination.
resultsThe highest shear bond strength was found when the bioceramic sealer was used and restored with the flowable resin composite. The strengths were 8.45 (1.17) and 6.67 (1.60) megapascals (MPa) in the immediate and delayed restoration groups, respectively. In contrast, the lowest strength, 2.91 (1.22) MPa, was recorded when calcium hydroxide-based sealer was employed and restored after allowing the sealer to set completely with resin-modified glass ionomer. Notably, there were no cohesive fractures within the tested restorative materials. All observed fractures occurred within the sealer materials, at the interface of the sealer and restorative material, or in combination. Moreover, the most common failure was a mixed failure.
conclusionsWhen flowable resin composite was used immediately before complete setting, bioceramic sealers showed a higher bond strength than calcium hydroxide-based sealers.
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.