ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2026
Comparative In Vitro Study of the Effect of Er:YAG Laser on the Debonding of Lithium Disilicate Veneers With Two Different Surface Treatments.
Article in International journal of dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of high-power laser use in the removal of esthetic restorations: a systematic review.Lasers in medical science · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative In Vitro Study of the Effect of Er:YAG Laser on the Debonding of Lithium Disilicate Veneers With Two Different Surface Treatments.International 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To conduct a comparative study of lithium disilicate veneers treated with two different methods, hydrofluoric acid and Er:YAG laser, and to evaluate the role of the Er:YAG laser in their debonding time. Additionally, to examine bonding failure modes of veneers after debonding by both methods. Methods and Materials: The research sample consisted of 20 permanent human maxillary central incisors; they were divided randomly into two equal groups and prepared to receive lithium disilicate veneers. The surfaces of the veneers in the first group were treated with 9.5% hydrofluoric acid for 90 s, while those in the second group were treated with the Er:YAG laser with a wavelength of 2940 nm, a frequency of 15 Hz, an energy of 400 mJ, and a water/air cooling ratio of 8:4 for 20 s. Subsequently, veneers in both groups were bonded with resin cement. The Er:YAG laser (with a wavelength of 2940 nm, a frequency of 10 Hz, an energy of 400 mJ, and a water/air cooling ratio of 1:1) was used in a non-contact mode to debond the veneers, recording the time from the start of laser application until debonding. The bonding failure modes for all samples were then evaluated using a stereomicroscope under a 20× magnification. Data were analyzed with SPSS, a Results: Statistically significant differences were found in the debonding time of veneers using the Er:YAG laser between the two groups ( Conclusions: Lithium disilicate veneers treated with an Er:YAG laser require a longer time to debond compared to those treated with hydrofluoric acid when using the non-contact mode of the Er:YAG laser. The bonding failure mode was similar for both methods, showing adhesive failure between the veneer's internal surface and the resin 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.