ArticleFrontiers in oral health2026
Polymerization of a resin composite luting agent: effects of temperature, preheating duration, and light-curing duration.
Article in Frontiers in oral health, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study evaluated how preheating temperature and duration, and light-curing time affect the microhardness (HV) and degree of conversion (DC) of a preheated resin composite used as a luting agent. Materials and methods: A microhybrid composite was preheated to 54 °C or 68 °C for 5, 10, or 15 min, and then placed between a 4.0 mm lithium disilicate overlay and a natural tooth as a luting agent. Light-curing was performed for 120, 180, or 270 s. The microhardness and degree of conversion were measured. Three-way ANOVA analyzed the effects and interactions of the variables. Pearson's correlation assessed the relationship between HV and DC. Results: DC was not significantly affected by preheating temperature, duration, or light-curing time ( Conclusions: Within the preheating conditions evaluated, higher preheating temperatures, longer preheating durations, and extended curing times were associated with increased microhardness, but not the degree of conversion, of the resin composite under ceramic restorations. Clinical significance: Among the preheating protocols evaluated, higher preheating temperatures, longer preheating durations, and extended multidirectional light-curing times were associated with higher microhardness of resin composites used as luting agents beneath thick (4 mm) lithium disilicate restorations, without affecting the degree of conversion. Because no non-preheated control group was included, these findings should be interpreted as comparisons among different preheating protocols rather than evidence of the benefits of preheating itself. Furthermore, the extended curing times investigated in this study represent optimal experimental conditions for the evaluated restoration configuration and may not always be practical or feasible in routine clinical settings. Minimizing the delay between preheating and curing may help preserve the effects associated with the investigated preheating protocols.
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.