SynthesisClinical oral implants research2021
Production time, effectiveness and costs of additive and subtractive computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) of implant prostheses: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Clinical oral implants research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Production time, effectiveness and costs of additive and subtractive computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) of implant prostheses: A systematic review.Clinical oral implants research · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- The clinical effect of the digital guide in the early implant restoration of second molars.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2023Trial
- Implant Placement and Immediate Provisionalization After Alveolar Ridge Reconstruction in the Aesthetic Zone Using a Digital Workflow: A 1-Year Prospective Case Series Study.Clinical oral implants research · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of different bleaching agents on the color stability, hardness and surface roughness of indirect esthetic restorative materials with different manufacturing methods.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Digital Workflow for Interim Prosthetic Rehabilitation Through the All-on-4 Concept Using 3D Printing Additive Process.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Immediate Implant Placement and Provisionalization in the Aesthetic Zone Using a Digital Workflow: A 1-Year Prospective Case Series Study.Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2025Observational
- The Role of Digital Workflow in Customizing the Prosthetic Solutions: A Literature Review.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Review
- Fully Guided Implant Placement and Immediate Provisionalization in the Maxillary Aesthetic Zone Using Prefabricated Restorations.Case reports in dentistry · 2025Article
- A Comparison of Internal, Marginal, and Incisal Gaps in Zirconia Laminates Fabricated Using Subtractive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Methods.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Interface misfit of conventionally milled and novel hybrid full-arch implant-supported titanium frameworks.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- 3D printed teeth with adhesive bridge preparation guide.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Design Factors of Ti-Base Abutments Related to the Biomechanics Behavior of Dental Implant Prostheses: Finite Element Analysis and Validation via In Vitro Load Creeping Tests.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- A retrospective cohort study on 3D printed temporary crowns.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Efficacy of CAD/CAM Technology in Interventions Implemented in Orthodontics: A Scoping Review of Clinical Trials.BioMed research international · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically review the dental literature for clinical studies reporting on production time, effectiveness and/or costs of additive and subtractive computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) of implant prostheses. MATERIALS AND
methodsA systematic electronic search for clinical studies from 1990 until June 2020 was performed using the online databases Medline, Embase and Cochrane. Time required for the computer-aided design (CAD) process, the CAM process, and the delivery of the CAD-CAM prostheses were extracted. In addition, articles reporting on the effectiveness and the costs of both manufacturing technologies were included.
resultsNine clinical studies were included reporting on subtractive CAM (s-CAM; 8 studies) and additive CAM (a-CAM; 1 study). Eight studies reported on the s-CAM of prosthetic and auxiliary components for single implant crowns. One study applied a-CAM for the fabrication of an implant bar prototype. Time was provided for the CAD process of implant models (range 4.9-11.8 min), abutments (range 19.7-32.7 min) and crowns (range 11.1-37.6 min). The time for s-CAM of single implant crown components (abutment/crown) ranged between 8.2 and 25 min. Post-processing (e.g. sintering) was a time-consuming process (up to 530 min). At delivery, monolithic/veneered CAD-CAM implant crowns resulted in additional adjustments chairside (51%/93%) or labside (11%/19%).
conclusionsNo scientific evidence exists on production time, effectiveness and costs of digital workflows comparing s-CAM and a-CAM. For both technologies, post-processing may substantially contribute to the production time. Considering effectiveness, monolithic CAD-CAM implant crowns may be preferred compared to veneered CAD-CAM crowns.
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.