ArticleOdontology2026
Assessment of mechanical, physical, and antimicrobial properties of tissue conditioners incorporated with plant extracts.
Article in Odontology, 2026. 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.
- Pterostilbene-Incorporated Tissue Conditioners Exhibit Sustained Antifungal Activity AgainstMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the antimicrobial effects of Mentha piperita, Thymus vulgaris, and Salvia officinalis extracts at varying concentrations (1%, 3%, 5%, and 10% by volume) against S. mutans and C. albicans, as well as to evaluate mechanical and physical properties, such as tensile bond strength, tear resistance, and surface roughness, after incorporating these extracts into acrylic-based tissue conditioners. The samples were prepared for the antimicrobial evaluation, comprising a negative control group (pure tissue conditioner), a positive control group (chlorhexidine digluconate and fluconazole), and test groups with plant extracts at different concentrations. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and agar disk diffusion methods were employed. Mechanical tests were conducted on samples containing the determined MIC. Antimicrobial test results were evaluated using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests, while mechanical properties were assessed by one-way ANOVA. A statistically significant difference in minimum inhibition zone diameters against S. mutans and C. albicans among the plant extracts at different concentrations was found (p < 0.001). However, no significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of tear resistance, tensile bond strength, and surface roughness (p = 0.198, p = 0.123, p = 0.094, respectively). 5% and 10% concentrations were found to be the most effective for positive control groups. 10% concentration of Thymus vulgaris demonstrated antimicrobial activity at a similar level to the 1% chlorhexidine digluconate for S. mutans. Additionally, incorporation of plant extracts at MIC level did not alter the tensile bond strength, tear resistance, or the surface roughness of the tissue conditioner.
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.