ReviewClinical oral investigations2025
Micro-CT analysis of cement adaptation and porosity in 3D-Printed permanent resin crowns before and after chewing simulation.
Review in Clinical oral investigations, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study evaluates cementation gap, cement volume, and porosity levels in three-dimensional crown restorations using four permanent resin materials and printers, and examines changes after thermomechanical ageing. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn the study, phantom models prepared on the maxillary first premolar were used, and the digital scanning, CAD design, 3D printing, cementation, and ageing processes were carried out according to standard protocols. The samples were divided into four groups based on the permanent resin material used: Group C (Methacrylate-based resin), Group S (UDMA-based composite), Group P (Bis-GMA/TEGDMA-based), and Group V (Bis-EMA/UDMA-based). All samples were designed with a 50 μm virtual cementation gap and evaluated by micro-CT before and after ageing.
resultsThe findings showed statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of cementation gap and porosity volume (p < 0.001). The lowest void volume and porosity were measured in the group C, while the highest values were observed in the group S. No significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of total cement volume. Additionally, a strong positive correlation was found between cement volume and porosity.
conclusionsThe obtained data reveal that the resin material used and the production process play a decisive role in the internal compatibility of restorations. Thermomechanical ageing, on the other hand, caused significant changes, particularly in structural properties. These results indicate that permanent resin restorations produced by 3D printing should be evaluated for their clinical viability considering cement gap and porosity behavior. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study has revealed that the cementation gap and porosity levels of permanent resin crowns produced with a 3D printer vary significantly depending on the type of material used and the production process. Therefore, in clinical applications, not only aesthetic and mechanical properties but also cementation compatibility and microstructural properties should be taken into consideration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40789822What 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.