ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
In vitro evaluation of the efficacy of a new orthodontic primer in metallic brackets cementation.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of a new orthodontic primer (Ambar APS Ortho; FGM Dental Products, Joinville, SC, Brazil) on shear bond strength (SBS) and degree conversion (DC) of metallic brackets bonding. MATERIALS AND
methods240 sound maxillary premolars were randomized into 24 experimental groups based on: (1) Orthodontic primer (Ambar APS Ortho, Orthoprimer and Transbond XT); (2) Light-curing time (3-seconds and 10-seconds); (3) Light-curing unit (Valo Cordless and Quazar); and (4) Storage condition (immediate time [IT] and after thermocycling [TC]). After each storage time, specimens were subjected to SBS testing at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until failure, and values were recorded in MPa. For DC (%) analysis, adhesive discs were prepared and evaluated using micro-Raman spectroscopy at IT only. SBS and DC data were analyzed using four and four-way ANOVA, respectively and Tukey's post hoc test (α = 0.05).
resultsAmbar APS Ortho showed significantly higher SBS values across both light-curing units compared to all other groups (p = 0.0001). For DC, Orthoprimer showed the lowest values, while Ambar APS Ortho achieved the highest. Across all primers, a 10 s light-curing exposure resulted in significantly higher DC values compared to 3 s (p < 0.0001).
conclusionsAmbar APS Ortho exhibited superior performance in both SBS and DC, for both 3 s and 10 s light-curing times as well as IT or AT, supporting its reliability for bonding metallic orthodontic brackets.
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.