ArticleJournal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry
Repair Bond Strength of Composite Resin to Dental Ceramic Using Various Surface Treatments: An
Article in Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry. 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.
- Managing Fractured Ceramic Restorations: Current Evidence and Best Practices-A Scoping Review.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Article
- Effect of orthodontic bracket bonding on the surface roughness of e.max glass ceramics: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 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
Aim: This research aims to evaluate and compare the effect of various surface treatments and adhesive types on the bond strength between composite resin and two types of ceramic materials. Materials and Methods: A total of 98 disk-shaped of 10 mm diameter and 4 mm thickness were fabricated for each of the zirconia (H. C. Starck) and lithium disilicate (IPS E-Max computer-aided design), which were implanted individually in the acrylic resin mold leaving one surface exposed. The disks in each group were sub-divided according to the surface treatments into seven groups ( Results: The HF + air abrasion groups registered the higher bond strength but with no statistically significant difference from groups of HF + bur. While the laser groups showed the lowest mean bond strength. Generally, E-Max registered significantly higher bond strength in comparison to zirconia. Finally, the BISCO repair system registered a significantly higher bond strength value in comparison to G-Premio. Conclusion: Combined surface treatment of HF + air abrasion with an intraoral repair kit can provide a promising method for repairing cracked ceramic restorations. However, repairing lithium disilicate is more predictable and successful than zirconia.
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.