Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39272065›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2024

Fracture resistance and fractographic analysis of pressable glass-ceramics with different partial coverage designs for maxillary premolars.

Abdelaziz M Abdelaal, Hany A Kehela, Ahmed A Holiel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  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

3 authors.

Abdelaziz M AbdelaalConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Hany A KehelaConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Ahmed A HolielConservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt. ahmed.holiel@alexu.edu.eg.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPartial coverage concepts have met the main goal of conservative dentistry. Vonlays, which combine features of veneers and onlays, are a recent alternative to full coverage designs and overlay partial coverage restorations. This in vitro study was conducted to compare the fracture resistance of the newly introduced pressable zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate with pressable lithium disilicate ceramic and to determine the optimal preparation design for partial coverage on upper premolars.

methodsFifty-two duplicated epoxy resin dies were prepared following vonlay and overlay preparation guidelines. For each preparation (n = 26), the specimens were divided into two subgroups to be restored with lithium disilicate (IPS e.max Press) or zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (Vita Ambria) (n = 13 each). Ceramic vonlays and overlays were bonded using dual cure resin cement, subjected to thermomechanical fatigue, and the load to fracture was tested by using a universal testing machine. The specimens were fractographically analyzed via scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The normality of the fracture resistance data was checked using the Shapiro‒Wilk test and Q‒Q plots, and two-way ANOVA was used to assess the effect of the type of preparation and ceramic material on the fracture resistance.

resultsThe group of overlays restored with zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate showed the highest mean fracture load (1218.69 N), while the group of vonlays restored with lithium disilicate had the lowest mean fracture resistance (967.15 N). The effect of preparation design and material type on fracture resistance was significant for both factors, p = 0.003 and p < 0.0001, respectively. Different features of the fracture surfaces, such as arrest lines, hackles, and directions of crack propagation, were observed.

conclusionsZirconia-reinforced lithium silicate exhibited greater resistance to fracture compared to lithium disilicate, making it a potential substitute for partial coverage restorations. Additionally, the overlay showed superior fracture resistance when compared to the vonlay preparation design.

Indexed as

BicuspidCeramicsDental PorcelainDental Stress AnalysisMaterials TestingZirconiumDental Prosthesis DesignDental Restoration FailureDental VeneersHumansInlaysIn Vitro TechniquesMaxillaMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningDental PorcelainGlass ceramicsIPS e.max Presslithia disilicateZirconiumzirconium oxideFractographic analysisFracture resistanceLithium disilicatePartial coverage restorationsZirconia-reinforced lithium silicate

Identifiers

PMID39272065
PMCPMC11395659

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.