ArticleBMC oral health2025
Bonding performance of universal adhesive systems with dual-polymerising resin cements to various dental substrates: in vitro study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Truly Universal Dental Cements vs. Conventional Ones-Comparison of Mechanical Properties.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A multi-modal strategy for enhancing titanium-bone interface strength and antimicrobial properties of PMMA bone cements.Materials & design · 2026Article
- Effect of Resin Coating on Dentin Bond Strength Under Immediate and Delayed Cementation Protocols.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Article
- Effect of Different Luting Protocols on the Bond Strength of Fiber-Reinforced CAD/CAM Blocks.Polymers · 2026Article
- Effect of zirconia nanopowders as functional fillers in dental adhesives on bonding durability and wear resistance to zirconia substrates.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- Does simplification signify compromise? Evaluation of different universal adhesives on shear bond strength:Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Laboratory study on reattachment of vertical root fractures using 4-META/MMA-TBB resin.Frontiers in dental medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResin cements often require substrate-specific pretreatment. Recently, universal adhesive systems have been introduced, simplifying procedures by eliminating the need for multiple adhesives and offering options that do not require light curing. This study investigated the bonding performance of universal adhesive systems combined with dual-polymerising resin cements on enamel, dentin, zirconia, lithium disilicate ceramics (LDS), and resin blocks.
methodsTwo universal adhesive and dual-polymerising resin cement combinations from the same manufacturer were tested: Bondmer Lightless II (BLII) with Estecem II (ECII), and Scotchbond Universal Plus adhesive (SBU) with RelyX Universal resin cement (RXU). Enamel, dentin, zirconia (Katana Zirconia UTML), LDS (IPS e.max CAD CEREC), and resin blocks (Katana Avencia P Block) were used as substrates. The universal adhesive was applied to all bonding surfaces, followed by resin cement application in micro-bore Tygon tubes and light curing for 40 s. Micro-shear bond strength (μSBS) was measured after 0 thermal cycles (0TC) or 10,000 thermal cycles (10kTC) (n = 20). Statistical analyses were conducted using t-tests and Welch's t-tests with Bonferroni correction (α = 0.05), and failure modes were examined.
resultsIn the BLII/ECII group, the mean μSBS values exceeded 15 MPa for all substrates at 0TC. After thermocycling, μSBS increased significantly for the enamel (p < 0.05), remained unchanged for dentin and zirconia (p > 0.05) and decreased for LDS and resin blocks (p < 0.05). In the SBU/RXU group, 0TC μSBS values exceeded 15 MPa for enamel, zirconia, and resin blocks, but thermocycling significantly decreased μSBS for all substrates (p < 0.05). Comparison between BLII/ECII and SBU/RXU group showed no significant differences for enamel and resin blocks at 0TC (p > 0.05), but the BLII/ECII group exhibited higher SBS in the other groups (p < 0.05). Adhesive failure was the most frequently observed failure type across all groups.
conclusionThe adhesive performance on diverse dental substrates including enamel, dentin, zirconia, LDS, and resin blocks was notably affected by the selection of universal adhesive systems in combination with dual-polymerising resin cements that were applied. The BLII/ECII combination demonstrated long-term stable bonding performance for enamel, dentin, and 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.