ArticleBMC oral health2025
Evaluation of 3D printed nano-modified resin shear bond strength on titanium surfaces (an in-vitro study).
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Insights into 3D-printed TiORSC advances · 2026Review
- Comparison of the Bond Strength to Titanium of Resin-Based Materials Fabricated by Additive and Subtractive Manufacturing Methods.Polymers · 2025Article
- Correction: Evaluation of 3D printed nano-modified resin shear bond strength on titanium surfaces (an in-vitro study).BMC oral health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterim restorations are crucial in dental implant procedures as they ensure patient's comfort, maintain esthetic appearance, and restore function during the healing process. Optimizing retention of these restorations ensures their long-term success. This study aims to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of nano-modified, additively manufactured resin-based interim materials to smooth and rough titanium surfaces.
methodsNinety-six specimens were prepared with a 3D printed resin (VarseoSmile Crown plus; Bego) and divided into 3 groups: group I (VS control) (n = 32), group II (VS 0.2%TiO
resultsSurface treatment showed a statistically significant increase in surface roughness of nanomodified composite specimens as well as titanium surfaces (P < 0.0001). The highest surface roughness was seen in group I (0.701 ± 0.113) followed by group III (0.690 ± 0.107), group II (0.653 ± 0.133) and rough titanium surface (0.548 ± 0.062). Regarding SBS values, before thermocycling, group I (8.85 ± 1.03) was the highest, followed by group III (8.29 ± 0.57) then group II (6.87 ± 0.53). After thermocycling, group III bonded to rough titanium surface showed the highest values (12.87 ± 0.77), while group II was the lowest (7.81 ± 0.94) (P < 0.0001).
conclusionSurface treatment significantly enhanced surface roughness and SBS of nanomodified composites to titanium surfaces. This improvement underscores the effectiveness of nanomodification and surface treatment in optimizing the adhesive interface, which is crucial for achieving durable bonding in dental restorations.
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.