ArticleBMC oral health2025
Evaluation of a Three-dimensional printable and two CAD/CAM hybrid resin materials used as permanent single tooth restoration: An in-Vitro study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of Local Anesthesia Techniques on the Microstructural Integrity of Dental Injection Needles: A Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy Analysis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Influence of printing angle on the mechanical and surface properties of 3D-printed hybrid resins for indirect restorations: An in vitro study.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Article
- Fracture resistance of CAD/CAM-milled, 3D-printed, and customized fiber post-and-core systems: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 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
objectivesTo evaluate and compare three commercially available hybrid resin materials used for additive and subtractive production (CAD/CAM applications) of permanent single-tooth restorations. MATERIALS AND
methodsOne-hundred and twenty-five bar-shaped specimens (14 mm length, 2 mm width, and 2 mm thickness) of 3 different hybrid resin materials were used in this study, being classified into 5 groups (n = 25). Group I: Lava Ultimate, group II: Vita Enamic, group III: Flexcera Smile Ultra
resultsFlexcera Smile Ultra
conclusionsDifferent printing angles (orientations) strongly affected degree of conversion, flexural strength and modulus of the 3D printed material. FS and FM of the 3D printed material were lower than those of CAD/CAM blocks. The different groups showed variable degrees of surface roughness. The fracture surfaces of the different groups revealed common features, indicating bending and showing different crack pathways.
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.