ArticleBrazilian dental journal
Biomechanical behavior of different designs of hybrid abutment-restoration on the posterior crown: a finite element analysis.
Article in Brazilian dental journal. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of margin designs and loading conditions on the stress distribution of endocrowns: a finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the influence of material and crown design on the biomechanical behavior of implant-supported crowns with hybrid abutment (HA) through three-dimensional (3D) finite element analysis. The study factors were the type of material used as the mesostructure or crown (zirconia, lithium disilicate, and hybrid ceramic) and the crown design cemented to the titanium base (mesostructure cemented to the titanium base and a crown cemented on it (HaC); hybrid crown-abutment, the abutment and crown are manufactured as a single piece and cemented to the titanium base (HC); monolithic crown cemented on the titanium base and screwed to the implant (CS); and monolithic crown cemented on the titanium base (CC). Four 3D models were constructed using an implant with an internal connection, and an oblique load of 130 N was applied at 45° to the long axis of the implant. The models were evaluated using the von Mises stress for crown, abutment, screw, and implant and maximum principal stress for bone tissues. The lowest stresses occurred in the groups with a lower elastic modulus material, mainly hybrid ceramics, considered a material with greater resilience. The cemented crown group presented the lowest stress values. The stresses were concentrated in the cervical region of the crown at the titanium crown/base interface. Mesostructures made of materials with a higher elastic modulus exhibited a higher concentration of stress. The presence of a screw hole increased the stress concentration in the ceramic crown. Cemented ceramic crowns exhibited better biomechanical behavior than screw-retained crowns.
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.