SynthesisInternational dental journal2025
CADCAM Versus Conventional Denture Bases: Network Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies Comparing Accuracy and Surface Properties.
Synthesis in International dental journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy of teeth positioning in bonded three-dimensionally printed complete dentures: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Influence of Denture Base Fabrication onDentistry journal · 2026Article
- A Review of Current Systems, Materials, and Protocols for 3D-Printed Splints, Crowns, and Dentures.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Review
- Nano-particle coated or impregnated acrylic resins in dental applications: A systematic review of in Vivo Evidence on mechanical properties, biocompatibility and clinical performance.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA) analysed the current evidence on in vitro studies comparing trueness of fit, surface roughness, colour stability, surface wettability, water sorption, water solubility, and microbial adhesion between conventional and digital denture bases.
methodsFrom inception until December 2023, a systematic search of published in-vitro studies from Scopus, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Studies was conducted. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024531416). NMA compared properties related to dimensional accuracy and surface properties between conventional and digital dentures. The ranking was performed using the surface area under the cumulative ranking guidelines.
resultsA total of 6004 articles were initially identified, of which 342 duplicates were removed, and 5566 were excluded by screening the titles and abstracts. A total of 96 articles were assessed by full-text reading, and 43 were included in the quantitative synthesis. As per the NMA results, MIL demonstrated significantly higher trueness of fit when compared with conventional compression moulding (standardized mean differences [SMD] = -2.25 [95% CI: -4.09, -0.40]), P = .017 (<.05) and TDP (SMD = -1.57 [95%CI: -3.14, -0.01]) P < .05. MIL demonstrated significantly lower surface roughness when compared with conventional compression moulding (SMD = -0.99 [95% CI: -1.72, -0.26]), P = .008 (<.05), and TDP (SMD = -1.08 [95%CI: -1.95, -0.22]) P < .05.
conclusionsThere is conclusive evidence that milled digital denture bases demonstrate higher trueness of fit and lower surface roughness than 3D-printed denture bases and conventional denture bases, as demonstrated by the concurrent network and pairwise results. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In vitro studies show that milled digital dentures exhibit higher accuracy and lower surface roughness. The clinical performance of milled dentures in relation to these properties needs to be evaluated by high-quality randomized controlled clinical trials.
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.