SynthesisFrontiers in dental medicine2025
Additive-manufactured ceramics for dental restorations: a systematic review on mechanical perspective.
Synthesis in Frontiers in dental medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of high-power laser use in the removal of esthetic restorations: a systematic review.Lasers in medical science · 2026Pooled it
- Additive manufacturing for Dentistry: A comprehensive review of techniques and applications.Progress in materials science · 2026Article
- Evaluation of fracture resistance and surface characteristics in monolithic zirconia: a comparative analysis of 3D printing and milling techniques.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Additive Zirconia in Dentistry: Techniques, Trends, and Future Perspectives.BioMed research international · 2025Review
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
Background: Additive manufacturing (AM) is rapidly expanding as a substitute for conventional heat-pressing and milling techniques for ceramic restorations. However, experimental and clinical evidence on the mechanical properties and performance of the final ceramic products is yet insufficient. This systematic review aimed to update the latest advances in additive manufacturing of restorative ceramics with a focus on their mechanical properties. Methods: This systematic review was structured using the 5-step methodology based on the research question: what are the mechanical properties of additive-manufactured restorative ceramics in comparison with subtractive manufacturing? The electronic literature search was performed independently by 2 authors in the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus. Published articles from 2019 to 2023 were screened, analysed and the relevant papers were selected for inclusion in this review. Results: A total of 40 studies were included. The available ceramics include zirconia, alumina and alumina-zirconia composites, lithium disilicate, porcelain and fluorapatite glass ceramic. The mechanical properties were summarized according to material and technique: density (15 studies), flexural strength (31 studies), fracture toughness (7 studies), Young's modulus (7 studies), hardness (11 studies) and performance (7 studies). Overall, the properties exhibited an upward trend toward the values of conventional techniques. Typical processing defects, including porosity, agglomerates, cracks, surface roughness, and other defects, were also analyzed. Conclusions: With significant technological advancements, the mechanical properties of AM ceramics have come close to ceramics by conventional manufacturing, whereas their reliability, the influence of printing layer orientations, and long-term performance still need further investigation.
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.