ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Analysis of Different Lithium Disilicate Ceramics According to Their Composition and Processing Technique-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of elevated extrinsic-stain firing temperatures on the optical, surface, and mechanical properties of lithium disilicate ceramics.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Article
- Comparative Quasi-Static Compressive Loading Performance of Two Ultrathin Ceramic Occlusal Veneers for Minimally Invasive Restorations.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lithium disilicate ceramics (LDSs) are widely used in restorative dentistry for their excellent aesthetic and mechanical properties. Variants like zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) and advanced lithium disilicate (ALD) were developed to enhance these characteristics. However, differences in their physical and optical properties, as well as the influence of processing techniques (heat pressing vs. CAD-CAM), remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the physical and aesthetic properties of LDS, ZLS, and ALD ceramics. A systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines were conducted. Studies published in the last ten years were retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, and Scielo. The inclusion criteria encompassed in vitro studies analyzing LDS, ZLS, and ALD ceramics with quantitative data on mechanical and aesthetic properties. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model, with subgroup analyses based on ceramic type and processing technique. Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses showed significant differences in flexural strength, hardness, surface roughness, wear, and translucency. The processing technique influenced these properties, with CAD-CAM materials exhibiting distinct performance compared to heat-pressed ceramics. Publication bias was assessed using Egger's test and the Trim and Fill method, and heterogeneity via meta-regression. LDS showed the highest fracture resistance and least wear, while ALD had greater roughness depth. Heat pressing enhanced hardness and reduced roughness, whereas CAD-CAM improved flexural strength. Considering these findings and study limitations, LDS appears the most suitable option for clinical use due to its superior mechanical performance.
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.