ArticleScientific reports2026
Er YAG laser debonding of zirconia restorations from titanium abutments depends on cement type water content and thickness.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigated the influence of cement type and water content on Er: YAG laser debonding efficiency and residual bond strength between zirconia restorations and titanium abutments with varying zirconia thicknesses. One hundred and sixty titanium-zirconia specimens were fabricated with zirconia thicknesses of 1 mm, 2 mm, and 3 mm. Specimens were divided into four groups (n = 40 per group) based on cement type: glass ionomer cement (Ketac Cem Easymix, KCE), modified glass ionomer (KCE with 35 µL water, KCEW), resin cement (Clearfil SA Luting, CSAL), and modified resin cement (CSAL with 35 µL water, CSALW). Each group was further subdivided by zirconia thickness (n = 10 per subgroup). After 48 h of storage at 100% relative humidity, Er: YAG laser irradiation (2940 nm) was applied for debonding, with the debonding time recorded. Specimens not debonded within 2 min underwent shear bond strength testing. A non laser irradiated 2 mm zirconia group served as the control. Statistical analysis employed Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon tests with Bonferroni correction. Interfacial morphology was examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The KCE and KCEW groups demonstrated significantly higher debonding rates at 1 mm and 2 mm thicknesses (> 50%), while the CSAL and CSALW groups showed minimal debonding(< 40%), particularly at 3 mm. The Kruskal-Wallis test indicated significant variations in both debonding time (χ² = 72.9, p < 0.001) and shear bond strength (χ² =107.8, p < 0.001) across groups. Debonding time varied significantly among groups, with the shortest times observed for KCE/KCEW at thinner thicknesses. Residual bond strength was comparable among KCE, KCEW, and CSALW groups; however, CSAL at 1 mm and 2 mm exhibited significantly lower strength versus 3 mm and control (p < 0.01). SEM analysis revealed microstructural alterations at zirconia-cement interfaces post-irradiation. Cement type, water content and restoration thickness significantly influence the debonding efficiency of zirconia crowns on titanium abutments using Er: YAG laser. Specifically, glass ionomer cements facilitate more efficient debonding, whereas for resin cements, water modification introduces a trade-off between bond strength and debonding performance. Debonding efficiency decreases substantially as restoration thickness increases. Clinically, these parameters are essential for optimizing the feasibility of laser-assisted crown retrieval.
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.