Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37323304›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

Comparative Effect of No Finish Line, Heavy Chamfer, and Shoulder Marginal Designs on the Fracture Resistance of Zirconia (Cercon) Ceramic Restoration: An In Vitro Study.

Sai Govind Gavara, Shashikala Jain, Himanshu Gupta, Suraj Sharma, Pratibha Panwar, Mariyam S Momin

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Managing Failed Fragment Reattachment: Influence of Surface Preparation and Chamfer Technique on Fracture Resistance.Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sai Govind GavaraDepartment of Prosthodontics, Crown and Bridge and Oral Implantology, Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College and Research Centre, Sriganganagar, IND.
Shashikala JainDepartment of Prosthodontics, Crown and Bridge and Oral Implantology, Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College and Research Centre, Sriganganagar, IND.
Himanshu GuptaDepartment of Prosthodontics, Crown and Bridge and Oral Implantology, Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College and Research Centre, Sriganganagar, IND.
Suraj SharmaDepartment of Prosthodontics, Crown and Bridge and Oral Implantology, Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College and Research Centre, Sriganganagar, IND.
Pratibha PanwarDepartment of Prosthodontics, Crown and Bridge and Oral Implantology, Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College and Research Centre, Sriganganagar, IND.
Mariyam S MominDepartment of Periodontics and Oral Implantology, Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College and Research Centre, Sriganganagar, IND.
Manubhai Patel Dental College and Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Because all-ceramic crowns are more aesthetic and biocompatible than metal-ceramic crowns, they have grown in popularity among patients and dentists. Poor finish line layout can result in restoration margin fracturing, hence, finish line arrangement is critical to maintaining the restoration's marginal integrity. The goal of this in-vitro study is to evaluate zirconia's resistance to fracture (Cercon) ceramic restorations with three marginal designs (no finish line, heavy chamfer, and shoulder). This study is important in contributing to the ongoing debate about the optimal finish line design for zirconia restorations. Methodology Three different finish lines, namely, biologically oriented preparation technique (BOPT) with a marginal width of less than 0.3 mm, heavy chamfer with a marginal width of up to 0.3 mm, and shoulder with a marginal width greater than 0.3 mm, were made on 10 extracted maxillary first premolar tooth to make 30 epoxy resin dies on which zirconia (Cercon) coping was done using CAD/CAM technology, and marginal discrepancies were measured using a three-dimensional scanner. All the copings were affixed to their respective dies using GIC luting cement, and fracture resistance was measured using a digital universal testing machine. Results The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed that the mean fracture resistance was more in the heavy chamfer finish line, followed by the no finish line (BOPT) and the shoulder finish line. No statistically significant difference was seen between the no finish line and the heavy chamfer finish line. There was a significant difference between the heavy chamfer and shoulder finish lines (p = 0.004). Conclusions To increase the biomechanical performance of posterior single zirconia restorations, heavy chamfer margins are indicated.

Indexed as

boptcadcamgicutm

Identifiers

PMID37323304
PMCPMC10264088
OpenAlexW4376564362

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.