Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39880854›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Evaluation of bond durability of different self-adhesive bioactive restorative systems to dentin.

Fawkia M Samy, Naglaa R El-Kholany, Hamdi H Hamama

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Fawkia M SamyConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.
Naglaa R El-KholanyConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.
Hamdi H HamamaConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt. hamdy_hosny@mans.edu.eg.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the bonding efficacy three bioactive self-adhesive restorative systems to dentin. A total of 80 permanent human molars were utilized in this study. The occlusal enamel was removed to exposed mid-coronal dentin; 40 molars were used for microshear bond strength testing, while the remaining molars were used for micromorphological analysis of restoration/dentin interface. Accordingly, 4 groups were assigned according to the used restorative materials; (G1) self-adhesive hybrid composite (surefil one), (G2) Alkasite-based material (Cention forte) without pretreatment primer, (G3) Alkasite-based material (Cention forte) with pretreatment primer (Cention primer), and (G4) resin-modified glass ionomer (fuji II LC). Then each group was divided into 2 sub-group according to testing time (n = 5); immediate (after 24 h) and delayed (after 6 months of storage in artificial saliva). Microshear bond strength testing employed a universal testing machine to quantify the force required for material fracture at the interface, followed by failure mode analysis. Interfacial micromorphology was assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). In µSBS, the outcome of Two-way ANOVA showed that, there is a statistically significant difference in "type of the restorative material" and "storage time" (p˂0.05. The output of Tukey post-hoc test revealed highest µSBS values were recorded in both immediate and delayed was recorded for Cention Forte with it's pretreatment primer (p < 0.05). Whereas Surefil one & Cention Forte (without primer) showed the lowest µSBS results among its immediate and delayed groups (p < 0.05). Regarding the micromorphological patterns of restoration/dentin interface using SEM, there was a difference among the tested groups. This study revealed that using of primers prior to application of alkasite-based restorative material is highly recommended as this techniques seems to be the most effective in obtaining superior bond strength with dentin. Accordingly, this outcome of this study highlighting the importance of using primer in enhancing bonding to dentin, which might slightly countered the initial manufacturer's recommendations and categorization of this type of restorations as a self-adhesive.

Indexed as

Dental BondingDental Restoration, PermanentDentinDentin-Bonding AgentsComposite ResinsGlass Ionomer CementsHumansMaterials TestingMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningMolarShear StrengthComposite ResinsDentin-Bonding AgentsGlass Ionomer CementsAlkasiteMicromorphological analysisMicroshear bond strengthSelf-adhesive hybrid compositeSelf-adhesive restorative materials

Identifiers

PMID39880854
PMCPMC11779961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.