ArticleCureus2024
Clinical Performance of Computer-Aided Design (CAD)/Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAM) Resin Nanoceramic Endocrowns in Restoring Molars: An In Vivo Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Trial
- The Impact of Cement Type on the Fracture Resistance of CAD-CAM Resin-Matrix Ceramic Anterior Crowns.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Effect of Dental CAD-CAM Resin Composite Thickness on the Polymerization Behavior of Dual-Cure Resin Cements for Endocrown Restoration.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
Background It is difficult to determine the optimal method for restoring endodontically treated teeth, as several factors affect this decision. Functional requirements and the amount of remaining coronal tissue are considered the most important factors in choosing the best restoration for those teeth. Endocrown was introduced as a conservative alternative for endodontically treated and coronally damaged teeth. Aim The aim of this study is to assess the clinical performance of the nanoceramic system for molar endocrowns by evaluating color change, gingival condition, prosthesis integrity, and the presence of secondary caries. Materials and methods The sample consisted of 20 endocrowns. The teeth were prepared with at least 2 mm of wall thickness and a cavity depth of 4 mm from the occlusal surface. The final impression was taken, and the prostheses were adhered using dual-cure resin cement. It was clinically evaluated according to clinical success criteria (United States Public Health Service) in terms of color stability, gingival indexes, integrity of the restoration, and the presence of secondary caries after a week, three months, six months, and a year. The statistical study was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 23.0 (Released 2015; IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA), and the results were considered statistically significant at the 95% level of significance. The Friedman test was used to study the significance of the differences in the average values of color change, plaque index, and the integrity of the prostheses during follow-up periods. Results The study showed a gradual increase in the degree of color change with follow-up periods. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the incidence of gingival changes, the integrity of the prosthetic margins, or the occurrence of secondary caries during the follow-up periods. Conclusions Within the limitations of this study, an endocrown made of CeraSmart nanoceramic is an acceptable option for crowning decayed and endodontic-treated molars with acceptable clinical performance.
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.