ArticleJournal of functional biomaterials2025
Impact of Autoclaving on the Dimensional Stability of 3D-Printed Surgical Guides for Aesthetic Crown Lengthening.
Article in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of autoclaving on the dimensional stability of surgical guides (SGs) for aesthetic crown lengthening (ACL) using different resins/printing methods. Fifty SGs for ACL were printed using five different resin/printer combinations (FL, SR, ND, KS and VC). All the SGs were scanned before (T0) and after (T1) sterilization. Autoclaving was conducted at 134 °C during 4 min. The STL files of each SG at T0 and T1 were compared with the original design (TR). Dimensional stability was measured using trueness and precision. Deviations from TR to T1 were calculated in the three space axes and by measuring the area between three reference landmarks. At T0, the FL group showed the best trueness and precision, while the SR group performed significantly worse than the other groups. At T1, all the groups except VC exhibited significant dimensional alterations compared with T0. Also, VC showed the best trueness and precision values. All the groups had a significant deviation in at least one space axis, while only the SR group exhibited significant variations from T1 to TR in the area between the reference landmarks. Most of the evaluated resin/3D printer combinations suffered significant dimensional alterations after autoclaving.
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.