Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40071154›Full record

ArticleJournal of medicine and life2025

Finite element analysis (FEA) of the stress behavior of some dental materials.

Paolo Di Francesco, Anamaria Bechir, Anca Iuliana Popescu, Manuela Victoria Chivu, Anca Monica Dobrescu, Raluca Monica Comăneanu, Mihail Târcolea

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medicine and life, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Paolo Di Francesco *Doctoral School of Dental Medicine, Titu Maiorescu University, Bucharest, Romania.
Anamaria Bechir *Doctoral School of Dental Medicine, Titu Maiorescu University, Bucharest, Romania.
Anca Iuliana PopescuDepartment of Specialized Dental Medicine Disciplines, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Titu Maiorescu University, Bucharest, Romania.
Manuela Victoria ChivuDepartment of Specialized Dental Medicine Disciplines, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Titu Maiorescu University, Bucharest, Romania.
Anca Monica Dobrescu *Department of Specialized Dental Medicine Disciplines, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Titu Maiorescu University, Bucharest, Romania.
Raluca Monica Comăneanu *Doctoral School of Dental Medicine, Titu Maiorescu University, Bucharest, Romania.
Mihail TârcoleaDoctoral School of Materials Science and Engineering, Politehnica University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study compared the biomechanical behavior of three widely used dental materials-zirconia, lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD), and 3D-printed composite (VarseoSmile CrownPlus)- for maxillary anterior bridge restorations. Finite element analysis (FEA) was employed to evaluate the mechanical response of these materials under normal occlusal forces, replicating real clinical conditions. Key factors analyzed included stress distribution, deformation, and potential for failure under high loads. For each material, material constants such as Poisson's ratio and Young's modulus were used in the simulations, with the values chosen from validated literature sources. The findings demonstrated that zirconia exhibited superior mechanical strength and uniform stress distribution, making it an ideal material for posterior restorations subjected to high biomechanical stresses. Lithium disilicate showed balanced stress distribution and proved to be a versatile material suitable for both anterior and moderate-load restorations, with its superior aesthetic properties making it an attractive option for anterior areas. On the other hand, 3D-printed composite materials were found to have higher stress concentrations, particularly in occlusal regions, and exhibited lower elasticity compared to the other materials, limiting their use in permanent restorations but making them suitable for temporary restorations or areas with lower mechanical demands. This study provides valuable insights into the selection of dental materials for different clinical scenarios, emphasizing the importance of FEA in optimizing material choice and restoration design. The results suggest that while zirconia is ideal for long-term durability, lithium disilicate remains the preferred choice for aesthetic requirements, with 3D-printed composites serving as a promising alternative for long-term temporary applications.

Indexed as

Dental MaterialsFinite Element AnalysisStress, MechanicalDental PorcelainDental Stress AnalysisHumansMaterials TestingPrinting, Three-DimensionalZirconiumDental MaterialsDental Porcelainlithia disilicateZirconiumzirconium oxide3D-printed compositesfinite element analysislithium disilicatezirconia

Identifiers

PMID40071154
PMCPMC11891613

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.