Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39308835›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

3D-Printed Complete Dentures: A Review of Clinical and Patient-Based Outcomes.

Mohamed H Abdelnabi, Amal A Swelem

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

2 authors.

Mohamed H AbdelnabiOral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontic Department, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, SAU.
Amal A SwelemProsthodontic Department, Cairo University, Cairo, EGY.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has recently been an increasing trend to shift the fabrication of complete dentures from conventional to digital workflows to shorten the treatment time and increase patient comfort and satisfaction. Digital fabrication of complete dentures can be achieved either by a subtractive process (milling) or by an additive technique (3D printing). The milling process offers numerous advantages; however, they require large-size production machines and are associated with low production efficiency, increased cost, limited block size, and a considerable waste of material. On the other hand, 3D printing technology can potentially offer the benefits of lower manufacturing and equipment costs, good surface details, and lower material waste. Hence, 3D printing is being considered lately by some researchers as a valid choice for manufacturing digital dentures. Therefore, the aim of the current review was to identify and highlight studies on 3D-printed dentures, mainly those investigating clinical and patient-centered outcomes. A search was conducted using the databases PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholar. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 16 studies that investigated clinical outcomes (masticatory efficiency, biting force, retention and stability, computerized occlusal analysis, and post-insertion maintenance) as well as patient-based outcomes (patient satisfaction, oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), patient-related complications, patient preference, and willingness to pay) were included. After a thorough review and discussion of these articles, it could be concluded that 3D printing of complete dentures offers many advantages from both a clinical and patient-based perspective. Retention and comfort with 3D-printed dentures were found to be comparable or even superior to conventional dentures. Moreover, retention of 3D-printed dentures constructed from conventional impressions and digitized casts demonstrated improved retention when compared to a protocol adopting intraoral scanning (digital impressions). Masticatory efficiency, biting force, OHRQoL, and patient satisfaction with 3D-printed dentures varied and were inconsistent among the included studies. Most of the studies reported positive results in the different domains and assessed aspects, while others reported some concerns (especially in terms of aesthetics and phonetics). With regard to post-insertion maintenance, printed dentures showed comparable results to conventional dentures in the short term. The technique seems promising with numerous benefits; however, further clinical research with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods is still needed to confirm these conclusions and address the potential concerns.

Indexed as

3d printed denturesclinical outcomesdigital denturesohrqolpatient satisfaction

Identifiers

PMID39308835
PMCPMC11415164

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.