ReviewCureus2025
Comparative Evaluation of the Marginal Fit of Zirconia and Polyetheretherketone Copings Fabricated Using Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) Technology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate marginal adaptation is essential for the clinical longevity of fixed dental restorations. Zirconia and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) have emerged as popular computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) materials for dental copings, but limited evidence exists directly comparing their marginal fit. This systematic review aimed to critically evaluate and compare the marginal fit of zirconia and PEEK copings fabricated using CAD/CAM systems. This review protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024604881). An electronic literature search was conducted in PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Embase, and EBSCOHost to identify studies published between 2016 and 2025. Eligible studies included in vitro experiments comparing the marginal fit of zirconia and PEEK copings using quantitative measurements. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were independently performed by two reviewers using a standardized form and the QUIN tool. A meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software where appropriate, and heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Sample sizes ranged from 18 to 40, using extracted teeth or typodont/resin models. Zirconia demonstrated superior marginal fit in six of eight studies, with mean gap values ranging from 17 to 60 µm. Meta-analysis of five studies (n=126 samples) showed a standardized mean difference (SMD) of 1.72 µm (95% CI: -0.46 to 3.90 µm; p = 0.12) favoring zirconia, though the result was not statistically significant. High heterogeneity (I² = 95%) was observed. Both zirconia and PEEK copings exhibit clinically acceptable marginal adaptation. Zirconia generally shows better consistency, while PEEK remains a promising alternative under optimized fabrication conditions. Further standardized in vitro and clinical studies with aging simulations are warranted to guide evidence-based material selection.
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.