ArticleClinical and experimental dental research2025
Investigation of the Combined Impact of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles and Bacterial Cellulose Nanocrystals on the Bond Strength to Dentin and Fracture Resistance of Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement in Primary Molars.
Article in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Investigation of the Combined Impact of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles and Bacterial Cellulose Nanocrystals on the Bond Strength to Dentin and Fracture Resistance of Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement in Primary Molars.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2025Article
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
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the microshear bond strength (µSBS) of resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) to primary dentin and the fracture resistance of primary molars restored with RMGIC, with and without the incorporation of mesoporous zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO NPs) and bacterial cellulose nanocrystals (BCNCs). MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 100 extracted primary mandibular second molars were divided into two tests: the µSBS test (40 teeth) and the fracture resistance test (60 teeth). The µSBS test included four groups: (1) RMGIC (control), (2) RMGIC + 5 wt.% mesoporous ZnO NPs, (3) RMGIC + 1 wt.% BCNCs, and (4) RMGIC + 5 wt.% mesoporous ZnO NPs and 1 wt.% BCNCs. The fracture resistance test included these groups along with an intact teeth group (positive control) and a prepared but unrestored teeth group (negative control). A universal testing machine was used for all mechanical tests.
resultsThe RMGIC + 1 wt.% BCNCs group exhibited the highest µSBS (6.35 ± 1.98 MPa), significantly surpassing the control and other experimental groups (p < 0.001). For fracture resistance, the negative control had the lowest value (422.70 ± 44.50 N, p < 0.05), while the positive control had the highest, significantly outperforming all groups except RMGIC + 1 wt.% BCNCs (p > 0.05). The RMGIC + 1 wt.% BCNCs group (1280.40 ± 340.87 N) demonstrated significantly greater fracture resistance than both RMGIC and RMGIC + 5 wt.% mesoporous ZnO (p < 0.05).
conclusionsIncorporating 1 wt.% BCNCs into RMGIC significantly enhanced both microshear bond strength and fracture resistance, leading to a higher proportion of restorable fractures. The positive correlation between bond strength and fracture resistance suggests that BCNCs-modified RMGIC is a promising restorative material for improving durability in primary molars.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.