ArticleClinical and experimental dental research2025
Surface Roughness and Wear Behavior of CAD/CAM Ceramics Against Vita Mark II.
Article in Clinical and experimental dental research, 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.
- Bletilla striata polysaccharide modified glass ionomer cement: enhanced mechanical and biological properties.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Tribological Performance of CAM-Processed Interim Dental Restoration Materials: Effects of 3D Printing, Milling, and Post-Processing on Wear and Surface Topography.Journal of functional biomaterials · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to assess the surface roughness (SR) and wear behavior of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) ceramics when compared to a feldspathic ceramic. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis in vitro study was conducted on three groups of CAD/CAM ceramic blocks (n = 10 each): a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic, a polymer-infiltrated ceramic network, and a resin nanoceramic. Additionally, 40 feldspathic ceramic blocks and 10 bovine incisors were used as antagonist materials. Surface roughness was measured by profilometry before and after wear testing (49 N, 120,000 cycles, 30 cycles/min). Wear depth was quantified using 3D scanning and image analysis software. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and paired t-tests (α = 0.05).
resultsBefore wear testing, the zirconia-reinforced ceramic showed significantly higher SR than the other groups (p = 0.00). All groups exhibited a significant reduction in SR after testing (p = 0.00). Posttest SR varied significantly between most groups (p < 0.05), except between natural enamel and the resin nanoceramic (p = 0.986). Wear depth differed significantly among the materials (p < 0.001), with natural enamel showing the lowest wear, comparable only to the resin nanoceramic (p > 0.05).
conclusionsAll tested CAD/CAM ceramics underwent substantial wear and SR reduction when opposed by feldspathic ceramic. The resin nanoceramic demonstrated the closest wear behavior to natural enamel and may be the most suitable restorative material for contact with feldspathic ceramics.
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.