Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38668023›Full record

ArticleDentistry journal2024

Shock Absorption Capacity of High-Performance Polymers for Dental Implant-Supported Restorations: In Vitro Study.

Maria Menini, Francesca Delucchi, Francesco Bagnasco, Domenico Baldi, Luigi Canullo, Paolo Setti, Marco Migliorati, Enrico Simetti, Paolo Pesce

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Dentistry journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maria MeniniDivision of Prosthodontics and Implant Prosthodontics, Department of Surgical Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, 16132 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6503-1201
Francesca DelucchiDivision of Prosthodontics and Implant Prosthodontics, Department of Surgical Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, 16132 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3470-1804
Francesco BagnascoDivision of Prosthodontics and Implant Prosthodontics, Department of Surgical Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, 16132 Genova, Italy.
Domenico BaldiDivision of Prosthodontics and Implant Prosthodontics, Department of Surgical Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, 16132 Genova, Italy.
Luigi CanulloDivision of Prosthodontics and Implant Prosthodontics, Department of Surgical Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, 16132 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9875-2929
Paolo SettiPrivate Practice, 16012 Genova, Italy.
Marco MiglioratiOrthodontic Division, Department of Surgical Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, 16132 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8671-3025
Enrico SimettiDepartment of Informatics, Bioengineering, Robotics and Systems Engineering (DIBRIS), University of Genova, 16132 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4488-4680
Paolo PesceDivision of Prosthodontics and Implant Prosthodontics, Department of Surgical Sciences (DISC), University of Genova, 16132 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8726-4145
University of Genoa · IT

Funding

Cendres+Métaux SA na
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRestorative materials might significantly affect load transmission in peri-implant bone. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the shock absorption capacity of two different polymeric materials to be used for implant-supported prostheses.

methodsA masticatory robot was used to compare the shock absorption capacity of veneered and non-veneered polyetherketoneketone (PEKK), Pekkton

resultsThe statistical analysis of forces transmitted at the simulated dental implant revealed significant differences between the materials tested and between these materials and zirconia, glass ceramic, composite resin, and acrylic resin. Only differences between PEKK and veneered PEKK and between PEKK and one of the previously tested composite resins were not statistically significant. PEKK samples demonstrated significantly greater shock absorption capacity compared to GFRC.

conclusionsPEKK revealed optimal shock absorption capacity. Further studies are needed to evaluate its efficacy in the case of long-span prostheses with reduced prosthetic volume.

Indexed as

dental implantshigh-performance polymerspolyetherketoneketoneshock absorption

Identifiers

PMID38668023
PMCPMC11048904
OpenAlexW4394918724

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.