Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40558897›Full record

ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2025

In Vitro Techniques for Microleakage Evaluation of Coronary Restorative Materials: A Scoping and Mapping Review.

Sofia Vieira, Carlos Miguel Marto, Ana Coelho, Inês Amaro, Inês Francisco, Francisco Vale, Siri Paulo, Manuel Marques Ferreira, Eunice Carrilho, Anabela Paula

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Sofia VieiraFaculty of Medicine, Institute of Integrated Clinical Practice, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal.
Carlos Miguel MartoFaculty of Medicine, Institute of Integrated Clinical Practice, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-9269-5417
Ana CoelhoFaculty of Medicine, Institute of Integrated Clinical Practice, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-2924-7926
Inês AmaroFaculty of Medicine, Institute of Integrated Clinical Practice, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal.
Inês FranciscoLaboratory of Evidence-Based and Precision Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-3283-5104
Francisco ValeLaboratory of Evidence-Based and Precision Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-2615-2929
Siri PauloFaculty of Medicine, Institute of Endodontics, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-3914-2423
Manuel Marques FerreiraLaboratory of Evidence-Based and Precision Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-5968-6161
Eunice CarrilhoFaculty of Medicine, Institute of Integrated Clinical Practice, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-5759-5557
Anabela PaulaFaculty of Medicine, Institute of Integrated Clinical Practice, University of Coimbra, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-6154-4173

Funding

FCT (Foundation for Science and Technology) Center for Innovative Biomedicine and Biotechnology (CIBB) through the Strategic Projects UIDB/04539/2020 (https://doi.org/10.54499/UIDB/04539/2020) and UIDP/04539/2020 (https://doi.org/10.54499/UIDP/04539/2020) and the Associated Laboratory funding LA/P/FCT (Foundation for Science and Technology) FCT supports CEMMPRE, through the Strategic Projects UIDB/00285/2020 (https://doi.org/10.54499/UIDB/00285/2020) and (https://doi.org/10.54499/UIDP/00285/2020) and LA/P/0112/2020 (https://doi.org/10.54499/LA/P/0112/2020)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo identify the in vitro techniques used for a microleakage evaluation of restorative materials of coronary structure through a scoping and mapping review. DATA: This scoping review aims to answer the following question: "what methods are currently for the microleakage assessment of coronary restorative materials?" SOURCES: The Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify relevant studies published between 2020 and 2024. The results obtained were grouped according to the evaluation method, and a narrative synthesis was made. STUDY SELECTION: The literature search identified 1014 articles, and 353 publications were excluded by title and abstract screening. From the remaining 297, thirty-three were excluded. Additionally, 8 articles could not be retrieved, which resulted in the inclusion of 256 articles. The results were grouped according to the type of microleakage evaluation method, resulting in four major categories: colorimetric, imaging, nuclear medicine, and microbiological methods.

conclusionsCurrently, several microleakage assessment techniques are being used, with the dye method being the most reported one. Several variations in the experimental protocols exist, which make it difficult to compare the results. The use of dyes and nuclear medicine methods is sensitive and can be used to evaluate microleakage.

Indexed as

in vitro assessmentmicroleakagerestorative dentistryscoping review

Identifiers

PMID40558897
PMCPMC12194229

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.