Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37715159›Full record

SynthesisBMC oral health2023

Fit accuracy in the rest region of RPDs fabricated by digital technologies and conventional lost-wax casting: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jiachao Qiu, Wei Liu, Danfeng Wu, Feng Qiao, Lei Sui

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Seating accuracy of removable partial denture frameworks fabricated by different digital workflows in comparison to conventional workflow.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Advances in 3D Printing for Removable Prosthetics-Insights and Perspectives.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jiachao Qiu *Department of Prosthodontics, Tianjin Medical University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Qixiangtai Road No.12, Tianjin, 300070, P.R. China.
Wei Liu *Department of Stomatology, North Sichuan Medical College, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, People's Republic of China.
Danfeng WuDepartment of Prosthodontics, Tianjin Medical University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Qixiangtai Road No.12, Tianjin, 300070, P.R. China.
Feng QiaoDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Tianjin Medical University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Qixiangtai Road No.12, Tianjin, 300070, P.R. China.
Lei SuiDepartment of Prosthodontics, Tianjin Medical University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Qixiangtai Road No.12, Tianjin, 300070, P.R. China. suilei@tmu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3586-9999
Tianjin Medical University · CNAffiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital technologies have recently been introduced into the fabrication of removable partial dentures (RPDs). However, it is still unclear whether the digitally fabricated RPDs fit better than conventionally cast ones in the rest region. The aim of this study was to evaluate the fit accuracy in the rest region of RPDs fabricated by digital technologies and compare it to those made by conventional lost-wax (CLW) technique.

methodsA comprehensive search was conducted in Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science and SpringerLink. Studies published up to August 2022 were collected. Two authors analyzed the studies independently and assessed the risk of bias on the modified methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) scale. The mean values of gap distance between rests and corresponding rest seats of each study were extracted as outcome. A random-effects model at a significance level of P < 0.05 was used in the global comparison and subgroup analysis was carried out.

resultsOverall, 11 articles out of 1214 complied with the inclusion criteria and were selected, including 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 non-randomized clinical trial and 8 in vitro studies. Quantitative data from Meta-analysis revealed that fit accuracy in the rest region of RPDs fabricated with CLW showed no statistically significant difference with digital techniques (SMD = 0.33, 95%CI (-0.18, 0.83), P = 0.21). Subgroup analysis revealed a significantly better fit accuracy of CLW-fabricated RPDs in the rest region than either additive manufacturing (AM) groups or indirect groups (P = 0.03, P = 0.00), in which wax or resin patterns are milled or printed before conventional casting. While milled RPDs fit significantly better than cast ones in the rest region (P = 0.00). With digital relief and heat treatment, hybrid manufactured (HM) clasps obtained better fit accuracy in the rest region (P < 0.05). In addition, finishing and polishing procedure had no significant influence in the fit accuracy in all groups (P = 0.83).

conclusionsRPDs fabricated by digital technologies exhibit comparable fit accuracy in rest region with those made by CLW. Digital technologies may be a promising alternative to CLW for the fabrication of RPDs and additional studies are recommended to provide stronger evidence.

trial registrationCRD42020201313.

Indexed as

Dental Casting TechniqueDenture, Partial, RemovableDigital TechnologyHumansResearch DesignRestConventional lost-wax castingDigital technologyFit accuracyRemovable partial dentureRest

Identifiers

PMID37715159
PMCPMC10504730
OpenAlexW4386769255

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.