ArticleBMC oral health2025
Short dentin etching with universal adhesives: effect on bond strength and gingival margin adaptation.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of different dentin etching protocols on the immediate microtensile bond strength of two bulk-fill restorative systems in class I cavities.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- The impact of three desensitizing materials on the shear strength between composite resin and dentin: an in-vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Effect of short dentin etching and water storage on bonding of resin composite to dentin with universal and two-step self-etch adhesive systems.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundShort dentin etching, a relatively recent technique, aims to improve resin-dentin bonding by preserving hydroxyapatite crystals within the collagen spaces. This study explores short dentin etching's potential in mitigating over-etching issues in deep proximal dentin/cementum margins, an aspect not previously investigated. This study evaluates the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and marginal adaptation of two universal adhesives using different etch-and-rinse strategies (15-second and 3-second etching) and self-etch strategies, both immediate and post-thermal cycling and mechanical loading.
methodsEighty-four molars underwent μTBS testing, categorized by the universal adhesive type (Tetric Uni and Prime&Bond Uni) (n = 42) and adhesive strategy (n = 14) with half tested after 24 h and the rest post aging. Forty-two molars received occluso-mesial preparations with proximal margins in dentin/cementum and were restored accordingly. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) examination of epoxy replicas for the restoration/gingival dentin interfaces was conducted after 24 h and aging. Dentin etching patterns were assessed using SEM. A three-way ANOVA evaluated μTBS data, while a two-way ANOVA and paired sample t-test analyzed marginal adaptation data (significance level is α = 0.05).
resultsAdhesive type, strategy, and aging significantly influenced μTBS. After aging, Tetric Uni subgroups displayed higher bond strength compared to Prime&Bond Uni subgroups. Marginal adaptation was unaffected by adhesive type or strategy, although aging reduced bond strength and adaptation for both adhesives.
conclusionsThe etch-and-rinse protocol yielded higher μTBS results for the HEMA-free isopropanol-based adhesive (Prime&Bond Uni). Marginal integrity was similar for both adhesives. The 3-second and 15-second etching times produced consistent results in all tests and for both adhesives. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The adhesive protocol for bonding universal adhesives to dentin is contingent on the adhesive composition.
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.