ArticlePloS one2024
Influence of chlorhexidine dentin disinfection on universal adhesive performance: Interfacial adaptation and bond strength assessments.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bond strength performance of a self-curing bulk-fill restorative system and light-cured restorative systems after aging: an in vitro study.Odontology · 2026Article
- Diode Laser Irradiation for Cavity Decontamination: A Pilot In Vitro Study on Antimicrobial Efficacy.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- Comparative evaluation of chlorhexidine and benzalkonium chloride pretreatments on bond strength durability of immediate dentin sealing with universal adhesive: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
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
purposeThis study aimed to investigate the effect of chlorhexidine (CHX) cavity disinfectant on interfacial microleakage and micro-tensile bond strength (μTBS) of a universal adhesive bonded to dentin in both self-etch (SE) and etch-and-rinse (ER) modes.
methodsClass I cavities were prepared in the coronal dentin of extracted human teeth and assigned to two etching modes (SE or ER), then subdivided by disinfection with or without CHX (n = 5). Cavities were restored using Single Bond Universal Adhesive and Filtek Z350 XT composite. After 10,000 thermal cycles, interfacial microleakage was assessed on serial B-scans obtained for each specimen using cross-polarization optical coherence tomography. For μTBS testing, resin composite was bonded to dentin discs, sectioned into beams, and subjected to tensile load until failure using a universal testing machine. Failure modes in fractured beams were analyzed under a stereomicroscope and categorized as adhesive, cohesive, or mixed. ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc at a significance level of 0.05 was used to compare the groups.
resultsMicroleakage was not significantly influenced by the etching mode or CHX disinfection (p-value = 0.068). For μTBS, the ER group exhibited the highest values, and CHX disinfection did not significantly alter these results (p-value = 1.000). In contrast, the SE-CHX group displayed significantly lower μTBS than the ER, ER-CHX, and SE groups (p-values of <0.001, <0.001 and 0.012, respectively). ER mode primarily resulted in adhesive failures, regardless of CHX. SE group exhibited both adhesive and cohesive failures, while SE-CHX mostly showed adhesive failures.
conclusionThe use of CHX disinfectant influences the bonding performance of universal adhesive differently depending on the application mode. Specifically, in the SE mode, CHX adversely affects bond strength to dentin. This suggests that when using universal adhesives in SE mode, clinicians should carefully consider the use of CHX disinfectants, as they may interfere with the adhesive's effectiveness.
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.