ArticleBMC oral health2025
Retention of 3D-printed versus conventional metal-reinforced acrylic mandibular denture bases: a comparative 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. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the retention of complete mandibular dentures produced via 3D-printing in comparison to those constructed from metal-reinforced acrylic resin regarding their retention. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis in vivo study involved the selection of twenty patients who were completely edentulous from the outpatient clinic of the Removable Prosthodontics Department at Misr University of Science and Technology. The participants were divided into two groups, each containing an equal number of patients; the first group received complete dentures produced via 3D printing technology. For the second patient group, metal-reinforced acrylic resin was used to make mandibular dentures, while conventional maxillary dentures were constructed. The evaluation of retention was carried out for both groups.
resultsA study of various types of dentures revealed that 3D-printed dentures exhibited a statistically significant improvement in retention (P < 0.05) relative to acrylic resin dentures that were reinforced with metal. Moreover, pairwise comparisons revealed significant increases in mean retention values at the one-month and three-month follow-up assessments.
conclusionThe results of this clinical study led to the following conclusions: Compared to complete denture bases manufactured via conventional manufacturing techniques, those fabricated via 3D-printing offer superior fit and retention. The retention of dentures, irrespective of their type, tends to improve over time.
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.