ArticleBMC oral health2024
Effect of cement spacer on fit accuracy and fracture strength of 3-unit and 4-unit zirconia frameworks.
Article in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- In-vitro comparison of the marginal and internal fit of 3D-printed crown restorations produced using different intraoral scanners and resin types: A Micro-CT analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Evaluating the effect of surface treatments and adhesive systems on shear bond strength and microleakage in 3D permanent resin denture bases.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Fit accuracy and fracture resistance evaluation of advanced lithium disilicate crowns (in- vitro study).BMC oral health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCement spacer is essential for compensating deformation of zirconia restoration after sintering shrinkage, allowing proper seating and better fracture resistance of the restoration. Studies assessing the effect of cement spacer on fit accuracy and fracture strength of zirconia frameworks are missing in the literature. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different cement spacer settings on fit accuracy and fracture strength of 3-unit and 4-unit zirconia frameworks.
methodsSixty standardized stainless-steel master dies were manufactured with 2 prepared abutments for fabricating 3-unit and 4-unit zirconia frameworks. The frameworks were assigned into 6 groups (n = 10) according to cement spacer setting (30 μm, 50 μm, and 80 μm) as follows: 3-unit frameworks; 3u-30, 3u-50, 3u-80, and 4-unit frameworks; 4u-30, 4u-50, and 4u-80. The frameworks were assessed for fit accuracy with the replica method. The specimens were cemented to their corresponding dies, and the fracture strength was measured in a universal testing machine. The Weibull parameters were calculated for the study groups and fractured specimens were inspected for failure mode. Two-Way ANOVA followed by Tukey test for pairwise comparison between study groups (α = 0.05).
resultsThe cement spacer had a significant effect on both fit accuracy and fracture strength for 3-unit and 4-unit frameworks. The 50 μm spacer had significantly better fit accuracy followed by 80 μm, and 30 μm spacers. Both 50 μm and 80 μm spacers had similar fracture strength, and both had significantly better strength than 30 μm spacer.
conclusionsFor both 3-unit and 4-unit zirconia frameworks, 50 μm cement spacer can be recommended over 30 μm and 80 μm spacers for significantly better fit accuracy and adequate fracture strength.
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.