ArticleBMC oral health2026
Fracture resistance and mode of failure of MOD cavities restored with short glass versus polyethylene fiber-reinforced composites: an in vitro study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo improve the strength of large cavities, different types of fiber reinforcements are used. Polyethylene and glass fibers are two popular options, each with its own set of benefits. This study evaluated the fracture resistance and failure mode of two types of fiber reinforcements: short glass fiber-reinforced composites and ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene fibers in MOD cavities.
methodsTo evaluate fracture resistance, eighty sound extracted lower third molar teeth were randomly divided into five groups (n = 16): intact teeth (positive control) (R1), unrestored teeth (negative control group) (R2), nanohybrid resin composite group (R3), SFRC group (R4), and Ribbond fibers group (R5). Teeth in groups R2, R3, R4, and R5 received standardized MOD cavities and were restored accordingly. R2 group left unrestored. In group R3, the prepared cavities were restored using a nanohybrid resin composite, in group R4, flowable SFRC was used as a base with nanohybrid composite layered over it. In group R5, a piece of Ribbond meshwork was applied in a U-shaped pattern, followed by the application of nanohybrid composite. Fracture resistance was determined using a universal testing machine. Following fracture, the teeth were examined visually and photographed via camera to determine the mode of failure.
resultsIntact teeth had the highest fracture resistance (3201.4 ± 123.4), followed by the SFRC group, the Ribbond fiber group, and the nano-hybrid resin composite group with values of 2132.9 ± 169.5, 2084.5 ± 177.2, and 1576.8 ± 118.3, respectively. Unrestored teeth had the lowest mean fracture resistance value of 354 ± 32.8. There was a statistically significant difference among all groups (P < 0.001), except for SFRC group and Ribbond fibers group which did not differ significantly (p = 0.436). Regarding failure mode results, intact teeth showed the highest repairability rate (75%), followed by the SFRC group (62.5%), the Ribbond fibers group (50%), and the nanohybrid resin composite group (31.3%). The unrestored teeth had the lowest repairability rate (12.5%). In terms of intergroup comparison, there was a significant difference among all groups (p = 0.05).
conclusionsShort glass and polyethylene fiber-reinforced composites have a positive impact on the fracture resistance and repairability of restored MOD cavities.
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.