ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2025
Comparative evaluation of marginal and internal fit of endocrowns with lithium disilicate, biocompatible high-performance polymer, and monolithic ceramic materials using computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing technology.
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical Performance of Endocrowns in Molars: A Scoping Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: To compare marginal and internal fit of lithium disilicate (LDS), Biocompatible High-Performance Polymer (BIO-HPP), and monolithic zirconia ceramic endocrowns fabricated using computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology. Materials and Methods: Thirty human extracted mandibular 1 Results: Bio-HPP biomaterial showed the highest marginal gap discrepancy followed by monolithic zirconia ceramic material and then LDS material in the descending order. Internal gap was highest in Monolithic Zirconia Ceramic material followed by Bio-HPP and LDS. LDS material exhibited minimal discrepancies in both the parameters (marginal and internal gap). Conclusion: Taking into account the limitations of this study, it is evident that the choice of Bio-HPP for endocrowns can be taken up in future after further clinical trials and long-term follow-up studies.
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.