ArticleBMC oral health2025
Enhancing dental porcelain repair strength: the impact of chairside plasma surface treatment-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. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The success of intraoral repair for fractured porcelain restorations has been questioned for many years. The longevity of the repaired restoration should be extended with effective methods that provide more sustainable clinical success. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of chairside plasma surface treatment on dental porcelain repair bond strength. Five hundred-fifteen rectangular specimens (12 × 14 × 1 mm) were fabricated from Cr-Co metal alloy (M) by lost wax technique, from zirconia (Z) and feldspathic (F) ceramic using the precision cutting device from CAD-CAM blocks. Specimens were pre-aged with 10,000 thermocycles to simulate intraoral conditions, and then divided into twenty-three subgroups: No treatment (M0, Z0, F0 groups/N = 45, n = 15), only plasma (MP, ZP, FP groups /N = 75, n = 25), only tribochemical silica coating via CoJet (MC, ZC groups/N = 30, n = 15), only hydrofluoric acid for feldspathic ceramic (FA group/n = 15), bonding agent (MB, ZB, FA groups /N = 75, n = 25), and their combinations (MCB, MCP, MPB, MCPB, ZCB, ZCP, ZPB, ZCPB, FPB, FAP, FAPB groups/N = 275, n = 25). Surface roughness (n = 10/per group), contact angle (n = 5/per group), shear bond strength (n = 10/per group), and failure modes (n = 10/per group) were evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed with a two-way analysis of variance at a significance level of α = 0.05. According to the results, plasma surface treatment increased the wettability of the materials without affecting surface roughness. When plasma was applied before the bonding agent, shear bond strength values were significantly improved (p < 0.001). The effectiveness of plasma and tribochemical silica coating was similar for zirconia (p = 0.960) and metal alloy substructures (p = 0.219). The MCPB, ZCPB, and FAPB groups had the highest bonding values within their main material groups (p < 0.001). Conclusively, chairside plasma surface treatment significantly enhances the shear bond strength of the repair material applied to the Cr-Co alloy, zirconia, and feldspathic ceramics without changing the surface roughness. It cannot replace HF acid or bonding agents, but it can serve as a substitute for tribochemical silica coating for dental porcelain repair procedures.
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.