ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Comparison of Dental Zirconium Oxide Ceramics Produced Using Additive and Removal Technology for Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry-Strength and Surface Tests: An In Vitro Study.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Is Additive Manufacturing of Dental Zirconia Comparable to Subtractive Methods When Considering Printing Orientation and Layer Thickness? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Pooled it
- Additive Zirconia in Dentistry: Techniques, Trends, and Future Perspectives.BioMed research international · 2025Review
- Comparison of the Intensity of Biofilm Production by Oral Microflora and Its Adhesion on the Surface of Zirconia Produced in Additive and Subtractive Technology: An In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Flexural Strength of Translucent Zirconia Materials Produced with Different Multilayer Technologies: An In Vitro Study.International journal of dentistry · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this in vitro study was to determine the mechanical and functional properties of zirconium oxide ceramics made using 3D printing technology and ceramics produced using conventional dental milling machines.
methodsForty zirconia samples were prepared for this study: the control group consisted of 20 samples made using milling technology, and the test group consisted of 20 samples made using 3D printing technology. Their surface parameters were measured, and then their mechanical parameters were checked and compared. Density, hardness, flexural strength and compressive strength were tested by performing appropriate in vitro tests. After the strength tests, a comparative analysis of the geometric structure of the surfaces of both materials was performed again. Student's
resultsBoth ceramics show comparable values of mechanical parameters, and the differences are not statistically significant. The geometric structure of the sample surfaces looks very similar. Only minor changes in the structure near the crack were observed in the AM group.
conclusionCeramics made using additive technology have similar mechanical and surface parameters to milled zirconium oxide, which is one of the arguments for the introduction of this material into clinical practice. This in vitro study has shown that this ceramic can compete with zirconium made using CAD/CAM (Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing) methods.
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.