Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39448991›Full record

Trial reportBMC oral health2024

Clinical performance of polyethylenefiber reinforced resin composite restorations in endodontically treated teeth: (a randomized controlled clinical trial).

Ahmed Abdelsattar Metwaly, Amira Farid Elzoghby, Rawda Hesham Abd ElAziz

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT05180903 nacompletednot on this map

Clinical Performance of Polyethylene Fiber Reinforced Resin Composite Restorations (Wall Papering Technique) Versus Bulk Fill Resin Composite Restorations in Endodontically Treated Teeth: A One Year Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorCairo UniversityRan2022 to 2023Enrolled28ConditionsDental Restoration FailureArmsX-tra base & GrandioSO reinforced by Ribbond
NCT07285772 nacompletednot on this map

Clinical Performance of Various Bilayer Biomimetic Resin Composite Strategies

TypeinterventionalSponsorTanta UniversityRan2024 to 2025Enrolled40ConditionsComposite Restoration, Composites ResinsArmsshort fiber reinforced composite , long fiber reinforced composite, light cure glass, flowable composite
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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

3 authors.

Ahmed Abdelsattar MetwalyConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Egyptian Russian University, Badr, Egypt.
Amira Farid ElzoghbyConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Rawda Hesham Abd ElAzizConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt. rawda.hesham@dentistry.cu.edu.eg.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of polyethylene fiber reinforced resin composite fillings compared to bulk fill resin composite fillings in endodontically treated teeth over a two-year monitoring period.

methodA total of 240 individuals with endodontically treated lower molars and a moderate amount of tooth structure were divided into two equal groups of 120 each. One group received polyethylene fiber reinforced bulk fill resin composite restorations while the other group received only bulk fill resin composite restorations, both applied as per manufacturer guidelines. Two proficient experienced blinded assessors assessed the restorations using modified USPHS criteria at baseline, 6, 12, and 24 months. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Data analysis involved the utilization of Mann-Whitney U, Friedman's test, and Nemenyi post hoc test, with age data being displayed as mean and standard deviation. The significance level was established as p < 0.05, and R software was utilized for statistical analysis.

resultsThere were no notable distinctions in any parameters or scores between the intervention and comparator groups at various time points. Alpha scores were present for retention, gross fracture, and secondary caries at all follow up intervals.

conclusionBoth direct resin composite restorations reinforced with polyethylene fibers and direct bulk fill resin composite restorations placed in endodontically treated molars with moderate remaining tooth structure demonstrated satisfactory clinical outcomes during a 24-month follow-up period. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Bulk fill resin composites directly placed in endodontically treated molars with moderate remaining tooth structure showed promise as a treatment option over a two-year period. CLINICAL

trial registration(06-01-2022) on https://ClinicalTrials.gov with the ID (NCT05180903).

Indexed as

Composite ResinsDental Restoration, PermanentTooth, NonvitalAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMolarPolyethyleneComposite ResinsPolyethyleneBulk fill compositeClass II cavitiesClinical trial that is controlled and randomizedFiber reinforced compositePolyethylene fibersRibbondTeeth that have undergone endodontic treatment

Identifiers

PMID39448991
PMCPMC11515345

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.