ArticleClinical oral investigations2024
In vitro bonding strength of denture teeth to denture base in CAD/CAM-milled, 3D-printed and conventional manufacturing processes.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- How Does the Bonding Strength of Reline Materials and Denture Teeth Vary Between 3D-Printed and Milled Complete Denture Bases? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2025Pooled it
- Shear Bond Strength Between Artificial Teeth and Denture Base Resins Fabricated by Conventional, Milled, and 3D-Printed Workflows: An In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- In-vitro evaluation of shear bond strength and bond-failure of isoamyl cyanoacrylate-resin adhesive ratios for bonding 3D-Printed denture bases and teeth.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the survival rates and fracture resistance of dentures made from different teeth (milled, 3D-printed, fabricated), bases (milled, 3D-printed, pressed) and bonding combinations. MATERIALS AND
methodsSpecimens (11 groups, n = 8 per group) were fabricated from combinations with a denture tooth (anterior tooth 21) and a denture base material. The groups consisted of combinations of teeth (6x), denture base materials (5x) and adhesive bonding options (4x). The teeth were printed, milled or prefabricated. The denture base was produced conventionally or was milled or 3D-printed. Two dentures were milled from one industrially produced block. The dentures were subjected to thermal and mechanical loading (TCML) and subsequent fracture test. STATISTICS: ANOVA, Bonferroni-test, Kaplan-Meier survival, Pearson correlation; α = 0.05.
resultsMean loading cycles varied between 221,869 (8), 367,610 (11), 513,616 (6) 875,371 (3) and 9,000,030 (4). ANOVA revealed significant (p ≤ 0.001) different surviving cycles. Log Rank test showed significantly (p < 0.001) different loading cycles. Fracture force after TCML varied between 129.8 +/- 97.1 N (3) and 780.8 +/- 62.5 N (9). ANOVA comparison revealed significant (p < 0.001) different fracture loadings between the individual systems. Correlation was found between fracture force and loading cycles (0.587, p < 0.001).
conclusionsDifferent survival rates and fracture forces were found for dentures made of different teeth (milled, 3D-printed, prefabricated), bases (milled, 3D-printed, pressed) and bonding combinations. Milled, pressed and prefabricated systems provided longer survival and fracture force than the other tested systems. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Optimal tooth-base combinations can help to produce a denture that is stable and resistant during clinical application.
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.