ArticleBiomaterial investigations in dentistry2025
Addition of silver diamine fluoride to restorative materials: effect on microhardness and microleakage.
Article in Biomaterial investigations in dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of fissure sealants following different silver fluoride application protocols in MIH-affected molars: randomized clinical study.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) on microhardness and microleakage of composite and glass ionomer cement restorations. Materials and methods: Cavities were prepared in 28 extracted teeth and restored according to four regimens (GIC, composite, GIC and SDF conditioned, composite and SDF conditioned). The restored teeth were Results: Group 4 SDF + Composite had the highest mean microleakage at 1.59 ± 0.02 (mm), and Group 1 (GIC) and Group 3 (Composite) had the lowest mean microleakage (0.63 ± 0.009 mm and 0.63 ± 0.02 mm, respectively). The highest mean microhardness (HV) was observed in Group 3 (Composite) at 327 ± 2.16 and lowest in Group 2 (GIC + SDF) at 283 ± 1.95. Results were statistically significant with a Conclusion: SDF conditioning negatively impacted microhardness and increased microleakage, which could negatively impact the longevity of restorations. Therefore, in this study, SDF was not suitable as a treatment to decrease the occurrence of secondary caries.
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.