ArticleJournal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects2024
Digital wear analysis of onlay restorations constructed from two pressable glass-based ceramics against natural enamel: An in vitro study.
Article in Journal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The wear resistance of lithium disilicate glass ceramics remains inadequately understood. Therefore, the primary objective of this in vitro study was to digitally assess the wear characteristics of lithium disilicate and zirconia-reinforced lithium disilicate pressable ceramics following chewing simulation. Methods: Twenty-two onlay ceramic restorations were fabricated on epoxy dies replicated from the maxillary first premolar ivory tooth master die. The onlay samples were randomly allocated to two equal groups (n=11) based on the material used: group L (lithium disilicate [IPS e.max Press]) and group Z (zirconia-reinforced lithium disilicate [Vita Ambria]). Self-adhesive resin cement was used to cement all of the samples. Each sample was occluded with the buccal cusps of healthy human upper first premolar teeth (n=22). Subsequently, all the samples were scanned using an intraoral scanner (Medit i500) at baseline and after chewing simulation. The acquired standard tessellation language (STL) files of baseline and post-chewing simulation data were superimposed, and the volumetric loss (mm Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the wear behavior of Vita Ambria compared to IPS e.max ( Conclusion: IPS e.max Press and Vita Ambria ceramics demonstrated comparable wear behavior.
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.