ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2025
A Comparative Evaluation of Push-Out Bond Strength of Fiber-Reinforced Composite Posts Luted with Two Different Cement Systems: An
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: This study compared the push-out bond strength of fiber-reinforced composite posts cemented with two different cement systems. Materials and Methods: The mandibular first premolars without caries were sectioned coronally with a cutting disc, leaving 2 mm of coronal structure. Resected teeth were measured for working length, and root canals were prepared and reviewed using gutta-percha cones. Following a week of obturation, post spaces were prepared by maintaining 5-6 mm of gutta-percha at the apex and restoring with fiber-reinforced composite posts bonded with self-adhesive cement in one group and dual-cure cement in the other. After cutting the excess post with the cutting disc, the root was split coronally. Utilizing the universal testing machine, samples were push-out tested and documented. Then, the specimens were examined under a stereomicroscope to determine the failure patterns. Results: The self-adhesive group had an average bond strength of 86.118 ± 42.746, while the dual-cure group had 133.71 ± 66.230, with a significant difference ( Conclusion: Dual-cure cement had stronger push-out bond strength with fiber-reinforced composite posts than self-cure cement.
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.