ArticlePolymers2021
Functional or Nonfunctional Cusps Preservation for Molars Restored with Indirect Composite or Glass-Ceramic Onlays: 3D FEA Study.
Article in Polymers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanical behavior of endodontically treated molars restored using two restorative approaches and two CAD/CAM materials: an in-vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Fracture resistance of posterior teeth restored by lithium silicate-based and hybrid ceramic partial coverage restorations with different preparation designs: a scoping review.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Review
- Mechanical behavior of esthetic CAD/CAM post-core restorations: a 3D finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Mechanical behavior of hybrid custom implant abutments with various crown materials: a 3D finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Elasto-Static Analysis of Composite Restorations in a Molar Tooth: A Meshless Approach.Polymers · 2024Article
- Thickness and Substrate Effect on the Mechanical Behaviour of Direct Occlusal Veneers.International dental journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evidence regarding the effect of the onlay preparation design for different CAD/CAM restorative materials considering the preservation of cusps is lacking. Molars were 3D-modeled in four preparation designs for onlay restoration: traditional design with functional cusp coverage (TFC), non-retentive design with functional cusp coverage (NFC), traditional design with non-functional cusp coverage (TNFC) and non-retentive design with non-functional cusp coverage (NNFC). The restorations were simulated with two CAD/CAM restorative materials: LD-lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD) and RC-resin composite (GrandioBloc). A 100 N axial load was applied to the occlusal surface, simulating the centric contact point. Von Mises (VM) and maximum principal (Pmax) stress were evaluated for restorations, cement layer and dental substrate. The non-retentive preparation design reduced the stress concentration in the tooth structure in comparison to the conventional retentive design. For LD onlays, the stress distribution on the restoration intaglio surface showed that the preparation design, as well as the prepared cusp, influenced the stress magnitude. The non-retentive preparation design provided better load distribution in both restorative materials and more advantageous for molar structure. The resin composite restoration on thenon-functional cusp is recommended when the functional cusp is preserved in order to associate conservative dentistry and low-stress magnitude.
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.