ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
Evaluation of long-term bond strength and mechanical properties of a recently launched light-cure resin cement for veneer cementation.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the initial and six-month bonding performance and mechanical properties of a recently launched light-cure resin cement compared to light-cure, dual-cure resin cements, and resin composite used for veneer cementation. MATERIALS AND
methodsFour luting cements-Panavia Veneer LC (PVL), Variolink Esthetic LC (VEL), Panavia V5 (PV5), and Clearfil AP-X (APX)-were tested for microtensile bond strength (μTBS), Knoop hardness (KHN), degree of conversion (DC), and ultimate tensile strength (UTS) at 24-hour and 6-month. All values were subjected to statistical analysis (α = 0.05). Fracture mode and resin-dentin interfaces were observed via SEM.
resultsOne-way ANOVA revealed significant differences among the materials for each measured property at 24-hour and 6-month (p < 0.001). The PVL group demonstrated superior bond strength at both time points (24-hour: 58.72 MPa; 6-month: 59.13 MPa), comparable to APX. In contrast, the VEL group showed a significant decrease in μTBS from 24-hour (27.62 MPa) to 6-month (10.65 MPa) (p < 0.001). The dual-cure cement PV5 showed marked improvements in μTBS and mechanical properties beyond 24 h (p < 0.001). KHN and UTS were highest in APX. PVL and APX had higher DC values than VEL and PV5. SEM revealed variations in resin-dentin interfaces across the groups.
conclusionsPVL demonstrated reliable and durable bonding performance, while PV5 showed improvements after 24 h, suggesting the need for extended curing time for optimal performance. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: PVL provides durable bonding and mechanical performance, making it a promising option for veneer cementation in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40116996What 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.