ArticleCureus2023
A Comparative Study of the Marginal Fit of Endocrowns Fabricated From Three Different Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) Ceramic Materials: An In Vitro Study.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Comparative Analysis of Marginal Adaptation Values between Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics and Zirconia-Reinforced Lithium Silicate Endocrowns: A Systematic Review of In Vitro Studies.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Pooled it
- Application of one-piece endodontic crowns fabricated with CAD-CAM system to molars.The Japanese dental science review · 2024Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe marginal seal and adaptation are important factors for successful restoration. An inadequate marginal seal can lead to bacterial microleakage, plaque accumulation, and eventually treatment failure This in vitro study aimed to compare the marginal gap of endocrowns fabricated from three different computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) ceramic materials.
methodsThirty extracted mandibular molars were selected for the study. Endocrown preparations were completed after root canal treatment. Teeth were divided into three groups to receive endocrowns fabricated of lithium disilicate ceramic (IPS-e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein), zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic (VITA Suprinity®, VITA Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen, Germany), and polymer-infiltrated ceramic (VITA Enamic®, VITA Zahnfabrik). The digital impressions were transferred to the design software to construct the endocrowns. The endocrowns were milled and cemented. The marginal fit was examined using a digital camera stereomicroscope at a magnification of 80X. Images were transferred to Image-J software (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States) to measure the marginal gap.
resultsOne-way ANOVA showed a significant difference in the marginal gap between the different ceramic groups (P=0.006). Tukey's Honest Significant Difference (HSD) post-hoc test showed that VITA Suprinity had significantly higher gap width values than VITA Enamic (P=0.005). No significant differences in gap width values were found between VITA Enamic and IPS e.max CAD or between VITA Suprinity and IPS e.max CAD (P>0.05).
conclusionThe marginal gap of endocrown restorations varies with different CAD/CAM materials (zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass-ceramic, polymer-infiltrated hybrid ceramic, and lithium disilicate glass-ceramic), but are all within clinically acceptable marginal gap width.
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.