ArticleThe journal of advanced prosthodontics2024
3D quantitative analysis and SEM qualitative analysis of natural antagonist enamel opposing CAD-CAM monolithic zirconia or lithium disilicate tooth-supported crowns versus enamel opposing natural enamel.
Article in The journal of advanced prosthodontics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Wear of Opposing Natural Enamel by Different Ceramic Materials in Fixed Dental Protheses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Tribology of dental materials: from laboratory metrics to clinical durability: review and translational roadmap.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the maximum vertical wear, volume wear, and surface characteristic of antagonist enamel, opposing monolithic zirconia or lithium disilicate crowns. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study comprised 24 participants (n = 12), who were randomly allocated to receive either a 5 mol% Y-TZP or a lithium disilicate crown in positions which would oppose the natural first molar tooth. The contralateral first molar along with its antagonist was considered as the enamel opposing natural enamel control. Data collection was performed using an intraoral scanner and polyvinylsiloxane impression. The means of the maximum vertical loss and the volume loss at the occlusal contact areas of the crowns and the various natural antagonists were measured by 3D comparison software. A scanning electron microscope was subsequently used to assess the wear characteristics. Results: The one-year results from 22 participants (n = 11) indicated no significant differences when comparing the zirconia crown's antagonist enamel (40.28 ± 9.11 µm, 0.04 ± 0.02 mm Conclusion: While some studies suggested that monolithic zirconia caused less wear on opposing enamel than lithium disilicate, this study found similar wear levels to enamel for both materials compared to natural teeth.
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.