ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2024
An in vitro study to compare shear bond strength of aged composite to two single-shade composites.
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of dimethyl sulfoxide on microtensile bond strength and surface morphology of tribochemically repaired nanohybrid composite: AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2026Article
- Article
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: (a) To evaluate and compare the repair bond strength of aged composite to two single-shade composites. (b) To determine the prominent mode of failure. Materials and Methods: Thirty composite discs of Filtek 250 (micro hybrid, 3M ESPE, USA) were aged in artificial saliva for 4 weeks and thermocycled for 5000 cycles. The samples were roughened with diamond points (TF12, Mani, Japan) and etched with 37% phosphoric acid. The composite discs were then divided into 3 groups of ten each and the surface was treated with silane coupling agent, followed by bonding agent application. The three groups were restored with one layer of 2-mm thickness of Filtek 250 (Group 1), Omnichroma (Group 2), and Topaz ONE (Group 3) composites, respectively. The samples were subjected to universal testing machine to evaluate the shear bond stress. The detached samples were assessed under 20X stereomicroscope to determine the mode of failure. Results and Conclusions: Multiple comparisons between the three groups demonstrated significantly higher mean repair bond strength when the same composite was used for repair and between the two single-shade composites, Omnichroma demonstrated significantly higher repair bond strength (P = 0.002). Within the limitation of this study, it was concluded that repair with the same composite resulted highest repair bond strength, while the single-shade composites provided acceptable repair bond strengths.
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.