ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2024
A Comparative Analysis of Bacterial Adhesion on Different Long-Term Provisional Fixed Prostheses Fabricated by CAD/CAM Milling, 3D Printing, and Heat Cure Technique: An
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 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.
- Microbiological behavior of 3D printing materials for indirect restorations: A scoping review.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- Clinical performance of long-term temporary fixed dental prostheses fabricated from CAD/CAM resin-based composite.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
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
Objectives: This study compares the bacterial susceptibility to three different provisional restorations manufactured with different laboratory techniques, i.e., heat cure, CAD/CAM, and 3D printing. Materials and Methods: Totally, 45 health patients with age group of 30-60 years undergoing complete veneer crown treatment were selected for the study and divided into three groups with 15 samples in each as Group I: the crowns were made from polymethyl methacrylate polymer fabricated by the conventional heat cure method, Group 2: the crowns were made from polymethyl methacrylate fabricated by subtractive manufacturing CAD/CAM method, and Group 3: the crowns were made from oligomers fabricated by additive manufacturing 3D printing. The samples were examined for bacterial adherence at scanning electron microscope. The colony-forming units (CFUs) were calculated, and statistically analyzed. Results: It has been determined that the digitally fabricated provisional restorations prove to be superior in terms of surface topography than to the conventionally fabricated provisional restorations. Conclusion: The study concludes that 3D-printed provisional restorations are more precise with reduced bacterial susceptibility than milled ones.
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.