ArticleACS omega2025
In Vitro Hydrolytic Degradation of Giomer-Based and Fluoride-Releasing Bulk Fill Composites Simulated for Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.
Article in ACS omega, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research on features selection of medical diagnostic models based on L-S-ACO algorithm.iScience · 2026Article
- Synergistic Effects of Simulated Energy Drink Exposure and Fatigue Loading on Bioactive and Conventional Resin Composites.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) often leads to tooth demineralization and degradation of dental restorations, increasing surface roughness and reducing strength. Limited studies have addressed acidic pH effects on fluoride-releasing giomer composites. This in vitro study evaluates surface roughness and flexural strength (FS) of six bulk-fill compositesSTARK, Filtek One Bulk Fill Restorative (FBF), SureFil SDR Flow (SDR), Tetric N-Ceram (TNC), X-tra fil VOCO, and Beautifil-Bulk restorative (BBR)before and after acidic exposure and abrasion caused by brushing cycles. Specimens tested included 60 disks (2 mm thick, 8 mm diameter) for surface roughness and 60 bar (25 mm × 2 mm × 2 mm) for FS. Samples were immersed in hydrochloric acid (pH 1.2) at 37 °C for 24 h, followed by 5000 brushing cycles (100 cycles/min) using medium-bristle toothbrushes. Surface roughness (Ra) and FS were measured at the baseline and post-treatment. Statistical analysis was performed by conducting Shapiro-Wilk tests, one-way ANOVA, and Tukey posthoc tests (α = 0.05). Results showed that BBR exhibited the highest increase in surface roughness after acidic exposure and brushing, followed by SDR, TNC, and VOCO. FBF and STARK demonstrated minimal changes. FS reduction was most significant in BBR (86.11 to 69.79 MPa, 18.95%) and SDR (106.78 to 88.27 MPa, 17.14%). These findings suggest that giomer-based fluoride-releasing composites, such as BBR and SDR, are susceptible to acidic degradation and brushing wear.
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.