ArticleJournal of functional biomaterials2022
Biomechanical Testing of Two-Unit Bridges and a Comparison of Replacement Retention Depending on a Cementation Medium, Replacement Position, and Gap Size.
Article in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2022. 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.
- Fit and Retention of Cobalt-Chromium Removable Partial Denture Frameworks Fabricated with Selective Laser Melting.Journal of functional biomaterials · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dental replacements are placed between the abutment teeth. The exceptions are two-unit bridges, as they are supported by a single tooth prepared only on one side of the missing tooth. The presented study deals with an analysis of a pressure force action on two-unit bridges placed in the frontal part (20 samples), where the pressure action is lower, and in the distal part (20 samples), where the pressure action is higher. A CAD program by 3Shape was used for digital designing with two different gap settings, 10 μm (20 samples) and 30 μm (20 samples). Two-unit bridges were attached to the prepared tooth using two types of dental cement (20/20 samples), which were selected for their physical and bioactive properties. All two-unit bridges (a total of 80 samples) were fabricated from CoCr alloys on Mlab cusing R by applying the Selective Laser Melting (SLM) technology. Mechanical testing was performed using the Inspekt5 table blue. The obtained data were used to verify the hypotheses-a difference between both types of cement (A ≠ B), a difference between the frontal and distal two-unit bridges (F ≠ D) and a difference between the gap sizes (10 ≠ 30). To confirm the given theories, data were statistically evaluated using the F-test and subsequent
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.