ArticleBMC oral health2026
Effect of different dentin etching protocols on the immediate microtensile bond strength of two bulk-fill restorative systems in class I cavities.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReliable bonding to dentin in high C-factor cavities remains a clinical challenge due to polymerization stress. Bulk-fill composites, including self- and dual-cured systems, aim to simplify placement and improve adaptation in deep cavities. However, limited data exist on how different dentin surface treatments affect their bond strength. MATERIALS AND
methodsSixty extracted human molars with standardized Class I cavities were randomly assigned to six groups based on restorative system (self-curing bulk-fill, and a dual-cured bioactive composite system) and dentin treatment (self-etch, short 3-second etch, conventional etch-and-rinse). µTBS was evaluated after one month of water storage. Two-way ANOVA was used to assess the effects of material and dentin treatment, and failure modes were analyzed descriptively using Chi-square test.
resultsDentin treatment significantly affected µTBS (p < 0.001), whereas the restorative system did not (p = 0.56). The highest µTBS was observed in the etch-and-rinse groups for both the self-cure (26.4 MPa) and the dual-cure systems (26.0 MPa), while the lowest values occurred in self-etch groups (self-cure: 18.0 MPa; dual-cure: 19.5 MPa). Failure mode analysis showed predominantly adhesive failures in self-etch groups and mixed failures in etch-and-rinse groups.
conclusionWithin the limitations of this study, etch-and-rinse dentin treatment appears to provide higher µTBS than self-etch. While short dentin etching could potentially offer a practical compromise, particularly for the self-curing bulk-fill composite. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: A short 3-second etch may improve bond strength over self-etch protocols, especially for the self-cure restorative system (Stela, SDI), suggesting a simple strategy to optimize adhesion while minimizing potential over-etching.
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.