ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Modern Light-Cured Restorative Composites as Luting Agents: The Effect of Preheating on Conversion and Film Thickness.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate (a) the degree of conversion (DC%), (b) film thickness, and (c) the effect of film thickness on DC% in modern light-cured resin composite restoratives [Filtek Universal (F), Clearfil Majesty ES 2 Universal (M), Tetric EvoCeram (T) and Viscalor (V)] used for luting composite onlays before/after preheating. For (a), the luting composites placed at 150 μm film thickness under the onlays (4 mm thickness, 2.9% transmittance) were light-cured for 120 s (3 × 40 s top, buccal, lingual sites) before and after preheating (54 °C/5 min-F,M,T and 65 °C/30 s-V). The DC% was measured at central, middle and side locations along the median in-length axis by ATR-FTIR spectroscopy. Specimens polymerized without onlays (40 s, top) served as controls. For (b), film thickness was measured employing a modified ISO 4049 standard (37 °C plate temperature, 5 N load) before and after preheating, using a dual-cured resin luting agent as control. For (c), onlays were luted with preheated T at 150 and 350 μm film thickness and light-cured for 2 × (3 × 40) s and 3 × (3 × 40) s, employing directly irradiated specimens (60 s, 120 s) as controls. For (a), significant differences were found in F and T before and after preheating. Before preheating, significant differences were registered between F-T, F-M, F-V and V-T, whereas after they were registered between F-M, F-T and F-V. All these values were significantly lower than the controls. For (b), significantly lower film thickness was recorded after preheating (-16.1--33.3%, highest in V), with a ranking of F, M > V > T (before) and F, M > T, V (after). All values were significantly higher than the control. For (c), increased exposure improved DC% in the greater spacer group, with the controls providing superior values. It can be concluded that the use of modern highly filled composites as luting agents for low translucency onlays may result in suboptimal polymerization and film thickness, warranting caution.
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.