ArticleThe journal of adhesive dentistry2025
Do Restorative Strategies and Delayed Restoration Improve the Bond Strength to Biodentine? In Vitro Study on Adhesive Restorations on a Calcium Silicate-Based Cement.
Article in The journal of adhesive dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shear Bond Strength of TheraCal PT and Calcium Silicate-Based Cement to a Flowable Composite Resin According to Bonding Strategy.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of the Physical Properties of Three Different Tricalcium Silicate Cements: An In Vitro Study.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe popularity of Biodentine (Septodont) use for vital pulp therapies requires verifying its bonding ability to other restorative materials. The null hypotheses were that different restorative materials and adhesive strategies did not influence shear bond strength (SBS) to Biodentine, nor its setting time. MATERIALS AND
methods204 plastic molds were filled with Biodentine, half set for 12 min, and the rest for 7 days. Specimens were divided into six groups according to the strategy and material used to restore over Biodentine (n = 17): (1) SE: Universal adhesive application in self-etch mode; (2) ER: Universal adhesive in etch-and-rinse mode; (3) Bur: Roughening with a bur followed by SE; (4) AO: Airborne-particle abrading with Al2O3 particles before SE; (5) RMGIC: Restoration with a resin-modified glass-ionomer; (6) SARC: Restoration with a self-adhesive resin cement. Groups 1 to 4 were restored with a flowable bulk-fill composite. Specimens were subjected to SBS, and the mode of failure was determined. Five additional specimens were evaluated under SEM-EDX. Data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis and U-Mann-Whitney tests (P 0.05).
resultsAO and SARC groups showed 100% pretest failures. At 12 min setting, the RMGIC group and Bonferroni correction achieved the lowest SBS values. At a 7-day setting, the Bur group registered the lowest SBS, and the groups restored with universal adhesive achieved the highest values. SBS results for the Bur and RMGIC groups were influenced by the setting time.
conclusionBur roughening or alumina airborne-particle abrading did not improve Biodentine adhesion to composite resin restorations, whereas the application of a universal adhesive achieved the highest SBS results regardless of the evaluated setting time.
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.