ArticleScientific reports2025
Mechanical properties of modern restorative "bioactive" dental materials - an in vitro study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- A two-year randomized clinical trial of bulk-fill and ion-releasing composites with universal adhesives in class V carious lesions.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Trial
- New Biocidal Additive for Resin-Based Dental Composites: Is Modification with Didodecyldimethylammonium Bromide (DDAB) Effective?Polymers · 2026Article
- Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Self-Reported Practices Regarding Modern Adhesive Systems Among Romanian Dentists: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Natural Bioactive Compounds in Dental Materials: Balancing Biological Activity and Functional Properties.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Hydrolytic stability and surface roughness of additively and subtractively manufactured CAD/CAM and indirect restorative resin materials.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Erosion and Erosion-Abrasion Resistance of Bioactive Glass Ionomer-Based Restorative Materials: A Surface Characterization Study.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Saving the split: An umbrella review on therapeutic approaches for cracked tooth syndrome.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Review
- Evaluating the physicomechanical characteristics of cetylpyridinium chloride-modified resin-based dental composites following short-and medium-term storage regimes: an in-vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Can lasers replace conventional methods in optimizing bond strength of bioactive materials?Lasers in medical science · 2025Article
- Shear Bond Strength of Biointeractive Restorative Materials to NeoMTA Plus and Biodentine.Polymers · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis of Flexural and Compressive Strengths of Bioactive Alkasite Compared to Other Ion-Releasing Restorative Materials.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Natural Silica and Plant-Derived Fillers for Dental Composite Resins: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Bioactive Resin Cement Color Stability and Restoration Thickness as Determinants of the Final Shade in a Glass-Ceramic CAD/CAM Material.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Impact of Shades and Thickness on the Polymerization of Low-Viscosity Bulk-Fill Composites in Pediatric Restorations: An In Vitro Study.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Color Stability in Bioactive and Conventional Resin Cements Under Thermal Stress Conditions.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Long-term ion release, fluoride recharge, pH modulation, and mechanical aging of an experimental ACP-based composite compared with contemporary bioactive restorative materials.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed at assessing the mechanical properties and degradation of commercial bioactive materials. The bioactive materials (Activa Bioactive Restorative, Beautifil Flow Plus F00, F03, Predicta Bulk Bioactive) and composite resin Filtek Supreme Flow were submitted to flexural and diametral tensile strength tests (FS, DTS), modulus of elasticity (ME) evaluation, and analysis of aging in 70% ethanol and saliva on their hardness and sorption. The results for DTS ranged from 33.16 MPa (Beautifil Flow Plus F03) to 47.74 MPa (Filtek Supreme Flow). The highest FS was 120.40 MPa (Predicta Bulk Bioactive), while the lowest values were 86.55 MPa (Activa Bioactive Restorative). Activa Bioactive Restorative showed the lowest ME, as well as the highest water sorption both in alcohol and artificial saliva. Moreover, aging in saliva induced a significant decrease in hardness for Activa Restorative (p < .01). Alcohol storage caused a significant decrease in hardness for all materials (p < .0001). All tested materials met the basic requirements for light-curing materials in terms of DTS and FS. However, all materials showed higher sorption in alcohol than in saliva, while hardness decreased significantly after 30 days. Predicta Bulk Bioactive presented the highest mechanical parameters, initial hardness, and the lowest sorption of alcohol and saliva.
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.