Question · asked by 1 review
Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP) vs Flavonoids (e.g., quercetin, proanthocyanidin): Immediate (24 h) resin-dentin bond strength (MPa)
- Population
- Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro)
- Intervention
- Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP)
- Comparison
- Flavonoids (e.g., quercetin, proanthocyanidin)
- Outcome
- Immediate (24 h) resin-dentin bond strength (MPa)
In the Etch-and-Rinse adhesive + biological ACAD protocol network, Peptide showed 9.857 MPa higher 24 h bond strength than Flavonoids (MD 9.857, 95% CI 2.588 to 17.126; Moderate certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versionsNo studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 2 · 100%High 0 · 0%
| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP) vs Flavonoids (e.g., quercetin, proanthocyanidin) Immediate (24 h) resin-dentin bond strength (MPa) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro) · 24 h (immediate), In vitro; extracted permanent human teeth; bond strength testing (SBS/microSBS/microTBS), Etch-and-Rinse + biological ACAD In the Etch-and-Rinse adhesive + biological ACAD protocol network, Peptide showed 9.857 MPa higher 24 h bond strength than Flavonoids (MD 9.857, 95% CI 2.588 to 17.126; Moderate certainty). Biomimetic Remineralization Strategies for Dentin Bond Stability-Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. (2025) All outcomes | MD 9.857 [2.588, 17.126] | 0 studies | Moderate |
Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP) vs Flavonoids (e.g., quercetin, proanthocyanidin) Immediate (24 h) resin-dentin bond strength (MPa) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro) · 24 h (immediate), In vitro; extracted permanent human teeth; bond strength testing (SBS/microSBS/microTBS), Self-Etch + chemical ACAD In the Self-Etch adhesive + chemical ACAD protocol network, Peptide vs Flavonoids showed no significant difference in 24 h bond strength (MD -3.074, 95% CI -10.755 to 4.607; Moderate certainty). Biomimetic Remineralization Strategies for Dentin Bond Stability-Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. (2025) All outcomes | MD -3.074 [-10.755, 4.607] | 0 studies | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Biomimetic Remineralization Strategies for Dentin Bond Stability-Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. 2025 All outcomes | June 2023 | 23 | Low / Moderate |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP) vs Calcium phosphate agent (e.g., CPP-ACP, Ca/P-PILP, niobophosphate) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro) · 1 review
- Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP) vs Fluoride agent (e.g., NaF/SDF/KF/CaF2) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro) · 1 review
- Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP) vs No biomimetic remineralization (control) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro) · 1 review
- Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP) vs Calcium-based agent · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro) · 1 review
- Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP) vs Hydroxyapatite (e.g., nano-HAp) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro) · 1 review
- Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP) vs HEMA/EGDMA-based desensitizer · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro) · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.