ReviewThe Saudi dental journal2023
Clinical outcomes of single full-coverage lithium disilicate restorations: A systematic review.
Review in The Saudi dental journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do we truly understand the long-term performance of contemporary prosthodontic materials?Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society · 2026Article
- Effect of tobacco and other habitual dietary staining agents on the optical properties of lithium disilicate molar crowns: A laboratory study.Tobacco induced diseases · 2025Article
- Full-mouth rehabilitation with lithium disilicate ceramic crowns in hypoplastic amelogenesis imperfecta: a case report and review of literature.BMC oral health · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDC) restorations exhibit microorganism infiltration, recurrent caries, pulpal lesions, periodontal inflammation, and cement exposure to the oral environment over time. All these factors lead to restoration failure. This systematic review aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of LDC full-coverage crowns (FCC) in permanent teeth compared with those of other full-coverage restoration materials. Materials & Methods: Search strategies were developed for four databases: Web of Science, OVID, PubMed, and Scopus. Data extraction and quality appraisals were performed by two independent reviewers. Data on the presence of caries, post-operative sensitivity, and periodontal changes were extracted from the included clinical studies. In addition to the outcome measures, data on the sample size, study groups, method of restoration fabrication, type of impression, and type of abutment were recorded. Results: We retrieved 3989 records for the title and abstract screening. Of these, 19 clinical studies met the inclusion criteria. The overall quality of the included studies indicates a low risk of bias. Most studies reported no pulpal involvement, recurrent caries, or post-operative sensitivity and presented a favorable periodontal response after the cementation of LDC-FCC during different follow-up periods. Conclusion: Based on the endodontic and periodontic clinical responses of natural tooth abutments and their supporting periodontium, LDC-FCC can be considered a clinically successful restorative option.
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.