ArticleFrontiers in dental medicine2025
Laboratory study on reattachment of vertical root fractures using 4-META/MMA-TBB resin.
Article in Frontiers in dental medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Reattachment of root fragments with appropriate adhesive materials is expected to be the last conservative treatment for preserving teeth with vertical root fractures (VRFs). Objective: This study evaluated the biocompatibility of 4-META/MMA-TBB resin for root repair, compared with iRoot BP Plus, Fuji IX GIC, and Clearfil SA Luting. Fracture resistance and microleakage of the reattached roots were also tested. Methods: The biocompatibility of set materials was evaluated on L929 fibroblasts. Cell Counting Kit-8 (CCK-8) assay, live/dead cells staining and flow cytometry were used to assess cell biocompatibility. VRFs were created in bovine teeth, which were then reattached with set materials (excluding iRoot BP Plus). For the fracture resistance test, the roots were vertically fractured through the root canals ( Results: Clearfil SA Luting group exhibited the highest cytotoxicity. The other test materials had acceptable cytotoxicity, not exceeding Grade 1 [relative growth ratio (RGR) > 75%] in CCK-8. Flow cytometry showed that the proportion of viable cells exposed to 4-META/MMA-TBB resin displayed no significant difference compared with iRoot BP Plus ( Conclusions: 4-META/MMA-TBB resin had acceptable cell biocompatibility for root repair, similar to iRoot BP Plus. It can provide good fracture resistance and excellent sealing effect for reattaching treatment of VRFs.
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.