A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Evaluation of the shear bond strength of a tricalcium silicate-based material to four self-adhering glass ionomer materials: an study. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • This study compared the shear bond strength (SBS) of EQUIA Forte HT against other materials like EQUIA Forte, glass ionomer cement (GIC), and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), bonded to NeoMTA 2.
  • A total of 120 samples were prepared and tested for both immediate and delayed SBS, revealing significant differences among the materials used.
  • EQUIA Forte HT demonstrated results similar to RMGIC, showing it as a promising option for restorative procedures after pulpotomies.

Article Abstract

Background: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of EQUIA Forte HT with that of other restorative materials, including EQUIA Forte, glass ionomer cement (GIC), and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) when bonded to NeoMTA 2.

Materials And Methods: A total of 120 holes were created in Teflon molds and filled with NeoMTA 2. The restorative materials were immediately applied using customized silicone molds. The samples were randomly divided into two main groups: one to measure the immediate SBS and the other to measure the delayed SBS. These two main groups were further divided into four subgroups based on the restorative material used: EQUIA Forte HT, EQUIA Forte, GIC, and RMGIC.

Results: The study groups showed statistically significant differences in the mean SBS ( < 0.0001). The immediate SBS of the RMGIC group (mean ± SD: 5.43 ± 1.22) was significantly higher than those of the GIC and EQUIA Forte groups, with no significant difference found compared to the SBS of EQUIA Forte HT. In the delayed SBS, both the RMGIC and EQUIA Forte HT groups (4.98 ± 0.67 and 4.93 ± 0.60, respectively) demonstrated significantly higher bond strengths than the GIC and EQUIA Forte groups (3.81 ± 0.57 and 4.2 ± 0.63, respectively). However, there were no statistically significant differences between the RMGIC and EQUIA Forte HT groups or between the GIC and EQUIA Forte groups.

Conclusion: Based on our findings, EQUIA Forte HT has shown promising outcomes when used as a restorative material following pulpotomies, with results comparable to those of RMGIC.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10726004PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fped.2023.1303005DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

equia forte
16
glass ionomer
12
shear bond
8
bond strength
8
restorative materials
8
ionomer cement
8
main groups
8
evaluation shear
4
strength tricalcium
4
tricalcium silicate-based
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!