ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Biocompatibility of CAD/CAM Milled Dental Restorative Materials: A Systematic Review from In Vitro Studies.
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 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.
- Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Response to Monolithic Zirconia Versus Porcelain-Fused-to-Metal Implant Crowns: Histological and Clinical Outcomes of an RCT.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2026Trial
- Fracture Resistance of CAD/CAM Lithium Disilicate and 3D-Printed Resin Crowns with Varying Occlusal Thickness: An In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Advances in Digital Restorative Dentistry: Evaluation of Clinical Outcome Parameters of CAD/CAM and 3D-Printed Inlays, Onlays, and Veneers-Scoping Review.International journal of dentistry · 2026Review
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
The introduction of new materials for fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) necessitates the demonstration of excellent physical and mechanical properties alongside biocompatibility to fulfill their intended function. This systematic literature review sought to assess studies that compare the biocompatibility and toxicity of CAD/CAM milling dental materials. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were screened to locate English-language, full-text articles published between 1 January 2014, and 31 October 2024. Initially, 1050 records were identified, and after a thorough screening, 78 full texts were evaluated, resulting in the inclusion of 33 studies. The reports were heterogeneous regarding materials, cell lines, and methodologies; thus, comparisons were made within studies rather than between them. The majority of the reviewed studies indicated that CAD/CAM milled materials generally exhibited lower toxicity than conventionally fabricated materials. Additionally, several novel experimental CAD/CAM materials demonstrated promising biocompatibility results.
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.