ArticleFrontiers in oral health2024
Internal and marginal fits of 3D-printed provisional prostheses: comparative effect of different printing parameters.
Article in Frontiers in oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review on influence of printing layer thickness on the marginal and internal fit of 3D-printed fixed dental prostheses.Odontology · 2026Pooled it
- The effect of build orientation on the marginal and internal fit of 3-D printed provisional fixed dental prosthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluation of the marginal and internal fit of endocrown restorations fabricated by the CAD/CAM system using additive manufacturing technique.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Review
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The influence of printing parameters on the marginal and internal fit of three-dimensional (3D) printed interim fixed partial dentures (IFPDs) has been understudied. This investigation sought to elucidate the impact of printing orientation and post-curing time on these critical factors. Methods: A total of 260 3-Unit IFDPs were printed using two different resins (130/NextDent C&B MFH and 130/ASIGA DentaTOOTH). For each material, specimens were printed with three different angulations (0-, 45-, and 90-degree in relation to the z-axis). Each was further divided into 4 groups ( Results: For the ASIGA group, 0-degree orientation generally exhibited better fit than 45- and 90-degree orientations, with some variations based on post-cure time. For marginal fit, ASIGA crowns typically showed better results with 90-degree orientation, while NextDent crowns demonstrated consistent performance across orientations. Post-curing time also influenced marginal fit, with longer durations generally resulting in improved outcomes. Conclusion: With different printing orientations and post-curing times, ASIGA and NextDent resins can produce IFDPs with acceptable internal and marginal fit. However, NextDent resin consistently outperformed ASIGA in terms of overall fit. Further research is needed to evaluate the long-term clinical performance of these materials.
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.