ReviewJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2024
Comparative evaluation of the marginal fit of computer-aided design-computer aided manufacturing fabricated crowns from direct and indirect digital impression - A systematic review.
Review in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 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.
- Mechanical Performance of 3D-Printed Resins versus CAD/CAM PMMA for Provisional Crowns: New Evidence under Simulated Clinical Conditions.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The accuracy of the digital impression method is responsible for fabricating crowns with adequate marginal fit which in turn determines the postendodontic prognosis. This systematic review was undertaken to identify the influence of the two digital impression techniques in producing full coverage crowns with better marginal fit. This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis statement. A detailed search was done in electronic databases (PubMed, EBSCOhost, LILACS, Cochrane) along with hand searches of reference articles. In vivo crossover studies comparing the marginal fit of the computer-aided design-computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) fabricated crowns from direct and indirect digital impressions published from inception till July 2023 were included in this review. The quality assessment of the included articles was done based on a modified Cochrane collaboration tool for crossover studies. A total of 280 articles were identified, after duplicate removal, title and abstract screening, and full-text evaluation, 7 articles were included in this systematic review. The overall quality of evidence is moderate. The CAD-CAM crowns fabricated from direct digital impressions exhibited a better marginal fit than those crowns fabricated by indirect digital impressions. The overall quality of evidence is moderate. Further clinical studies has to be conducted for evaluating the latest technologies towards achieving the misfit of zero.
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.