ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2026
Comparison of urethane dimethacrylate monomer elution between indirect composites when subjecting to thermocycling.
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: The use of resin-based computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) blocks is increasing in restorative dentistry. However, the potential elution of urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA) into saliva and its associated safety implications remain insufficiently investigated. Aims: To identify and quantify the monomer elution of two different indirect composite blocks before and after thermocycling. Settings and Design: Subjects and Methods: Two composite CAD-CAM blocks were investigated: a resin-based composite block (RCB, Shofu HC Block) and a polymer-infiltrated ceramic network block (PICN, Vita Enamic). Twenty specimens from each material ( Statistical Analysis Used: Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: No quantifiable level of UDMA was observed in either RCB or PICN before thermocycling. After 500 cycles of thermocycling, UDMA elution was identified in RCB (0.04 mg/mL), but remained undetectable in PICN. Following 10,000 cycles of thermocycling, both RCB and PICN showed UDMA release of 0.01 mg/mL. However, the Kruskal-Wallis test revealed no statistically significant differences among groups ( Conclusions: The highest UDMA elution occurred in RCB after 500 cycles of thermocycling. Despite differences in polymer structure, thermocycling did not significantly influence UDMA release in either material.
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.