ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
Evaluation of physicochemical characteristics of experimental resin infiltrant containing graphene oxide.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. 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.
- Resin Infiltration in the Conservative Management of Incipient Dental Caries: An Evidence-Based Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
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
Abstract
objectiveThis in vitro study aimed to evaluate the influence of 0.5% graphene oxide (GO) incorporated into an experimental resin infiltrant on its physicochemical and antibacterial properties compared to Commercial Icon (IC) and Experimental (E) groups. MATERIALS AND
methodsExperimental groups were manipulated (TEGDMA and BisEMA based) with and without incorporation of 0.5% and commercial infiltrant were obtained. Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) was used to assess the degree of conversion (DC) (n=5) (0.5ml) before and after photoactivation. Sorption (So) and solubility (Sol) (n=10) (5x1mm) were evaluated after 7 days of water storage. Three-point bending tests determined the elastic modulus (EM) and flexural strength (FS) (n=10) (7x2x1mm). Initial carious lesions were induced in bovine enamel (4x4mm) and treated according to the groups and analyzed through Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy (CLSM) for penetration depth (n=3). Antibacterial activity was evaluated using a colony-forming unit (CFU) assay to assess biofilm inhibition, MTT metabolic test, and biofilm analysis via Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM). Generalized linear models were applied for So, Sol, EM, and FS, while Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's tests analyzed DC, CFU, and MTT.
resultsGO differed from IC and E in DC after 80s photoactivation (82.9), exhibiting superior results. GO showed higher So and Sol values (13,96x10⁻⁵ and 6,39x10⁻⁵, respectively). IC demonstrated the best EM and FS (1.09 and 86.74, respectively). CLSM confirmed enamel infiltration for GO and IC. E showed the highest CFU (1.71 × 10⁷ CFU/ml), while GO had the lowest (2.22 × 10⁶ CFU/ml). E exhibited the highest MTT absorbance (0.2395 x 540nm).
conclusionIncorporating GO into the experimental infiltrant is feasible, but further studies are needed to optimize its properties. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Infiltrants with graphene oxide and commercial formulations both demonstrated satisfactory antibacterial and infiltration performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41139719What 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.