ArticleBMC oral health2025
Evaluating the effect of surface treatments and adhesive systems on shear bond strength and microleakage in 3D permanent resin denture bases.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate and compare microleakage and bond strength values resulting from various surface treatments and adhesive system processes applied to different resin materials.
methods270 samples of two different 3D resin materials (Saremco Crowntec-Saremco Denture) were prepared by various surface treatments (control: Group C, hydrofluoric acid application: Group A, tribochemical sandblasting: Group T), adhesive systems (bond: Group B, resin cement: Group R, resin: Group P) (n = 30). Microleakage and bond strength tests were performed, and the data obtained were analyzed by a two-way ANOVA.
resultsThe findings revealed statistically significant differences among the analyzed groups (p < 0.001). While the mean values of microleakage in Group C were the highest (0.15 ± 0.04 mm SIGNIFICANCE: The study found that applying Group A (2.50 ± 1.47 MPa) weakened the bond, while Group T (3.78 ± 2.63 MPa) had lower values than Group C (13.52 ± 1.37 MPa). Among the adhesive systems, bond application showed the best performance. The application of surface treatment decreases bond strength with reduced microleakage. These findings emphasize the importance of selecting appropriate adhesive systems for 3D-printed complete dentures in clinical applications. It shows the best ways for both clinicans and patients to bond in order to meet the mechanical and aesthetic needs that come up with long-term prostheses use.
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.