Does the Type of Resin Luting Material Affect the Bonding of CAD/CAM Materials to Dentin?

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.

1. Clinical performance of indirect hybrid ceramic onlay restorations cemented with injectable resin composite versus dual-cure resin cement: an 18-month randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2025
   Trial
2. Functional Adhesives for a Restorative Future.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026
   Review
3. An Assessment of the Micro-Tensile Bond Strength of Composites for Indirect Restoration to Enamel and Dentin.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025
   Article
4. Effect of Different Luting Methods on the Microtensile Bond Strength of CAD/CAM Resin Blocks.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
   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

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as