ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Technique-dependent differences in internal adaptation, porosity and degree of conversion of short fibre-reinforced composite restorations in deep MOD cavities.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesEvaluate and compare the internal gap (IG), closed porosity (CP), and degree of conversion (DC) of short fibre-reinforced composite (SFRC) restorations applied using various techniques in an in vitro model. MATERIALS AND
methodsFive restorative protocols were tested (n = 20/group): (1) flowable bulk-fill SFRC; (2) flowable liner + flowable bulk-fill SFRC; (3) polyethylene fibre mesh + flowable liner + flowable bulk-fill SFRC; (4) flowable bulk-fill SFRC + high-viscosity SFRC (snowplow technique); and (5) conventional layered resin-based composite (RBC). IG (gap volume/interface volume) and CP (void volume/restoration volume) were assessed by micro-CT. DC was measured at three depths using micro-Raman spectroscopy. Data were analyzed using ANOVA, General Linear Model, and correlation tests (α = 0.05).
resultsSignificant differences were found among groups for IG, CP, and DC (p < 0.001). Groups 1, 2, and 4 showed significantly lower IG (0.46-0.53%) than Group 3 (2.78%) and Group 5 (1.09%). Group 1 demonstrated the lowest CP (0.11%), while Group 4 exhibited the highest (0.5%). DC ranged from 74.8 to 88.4%, with significant depth-related variations. Group 2 and Group 5 did not differ in average DC (p = 0.99).
conclusionsThe flowable bulk-fill SFRC techniques demonstrated favorable internal adaptation, low CP, and acceptable DC, supporting their potential use in deep cavities. In contrast, polyethylene fibre mesh reinforcement increased IG formation, whereas the snowplow technique achieved high DC at the expense of increased CP. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Flowable bulk-fill SFRC may improve internal adaptation, reduce porosity, and achieve acceptable DC in deep cavities. Polyethylene fibre mesh and snowplow techniques exhibit technique-dependent limitations.
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.