ArticleJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.]2026
Fracture Resistance of Reattached Tooth Fragments: Influence of Adhesive Curing Mode and Composite Viscosity.
Article in Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.], 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the influence of adhesive curing mode and composite viscosity type on the fracture resistance of reattached anterior teeth using the internal groove technique. MATERIALS AND
methodsSeventy-two extracted human maxillary central incisors were fractured using a standardized protocol and randomly assigned to six groups according to adhesive curing mode (light-cure, self-cure, and dual-cure) and composite viscosity type (flowable and packable) (n = 12). Fragments were reattached using standardized procedures. All specimens were subjected to thermocycling (5000 cycles) and fracture resistance was measured using a universal testing machine. Fracture resistance recovery (%) was calculated. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests (α = 0.05).
resultsBoth adhesive curing mode and composite viscosity type significantly influenced fracture resistance (p < 0.001), while no significant interaction between factors was observed (p > 0.05). The highest fracture resistance recovery was observed in the dual-cure packable group, whereas the lowest values were recorded in the light-cure flowable group. Packable composites demonstrated higher fracture resistance than flowable composites across all adhesive curing modes.
conclusionDual-cure adhesives combined with packable composites demonstrated the highest fracture resistance, whereas light-cure adhesives with flowable composites demonstrated the lowest values. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Dual-cure adhesives combined with packable composites demonstrated higher fracture resistance in fragment reattachment procedures.
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.