Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41622140›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2026

Fracture resistance of different overlay designs with novel lithium disilicate materials on 3D printed dies.

Radwa Salah Atta, Ahmad Aboelfadl, Nancy Essam Bahig Rafla

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Radwa Salah AttaDepartment of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Organization of African Unity Street, Heliopolis, Cairo, Egypt. Radwa_atta@hotmail.com.
Ahmad AboelfadlDepartment of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Organization of African Unity Street, Heliopolis, Cairo, Egypt.
Nancy Essam Bahig RaflaDepartment of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Organization of African Unity Street, Heliopolis, Cairo, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

statement of problemModerate coronal destruction cases have recently been repaired using minimally invasive adhesive overlays with varying cavity depths and occlusal preparations. The optimal cavity preparation (criteria and dimensions) varies according to clinical crown length, patient age and inter occlusal space. Consequently, design and thickness of restoration will affect esthetics, function and fracture resistance necessitates the employment of new materials capable of meeting their full potential. However, there are numerous available materials and different preparation designs. However, there is insufficient data on the selection of appropriate material, preparation thickness and their effect on fracture resistance.

objectiveTo evaluate the fracture resistance of chairside (CAD/CAM) lithium disilicate using two diverse overlay restoration designs for premolars. MATERIALS AND

methodsSpecimens were prepared using a CNC milling machine, according to two different overlay designs: (A) overlay with 2 mm cavity depth & 1.5 mm occlusal thickness, (B) overlay with 1.5 mm cavity depth & 2 mm occlusal thickness. 42 restorations were designed and fabricated with a chairside CAD/CAM system (Mc XL, Dentsply Sirona) using 3 CAD/CAM lithium disilicate blocks (IPS e.max CAD, Amber Mill, CEREC Tessers) (14 specimens/group). Restorations were luted to 3D printed resin dies using standard resin luting cement (Breeze, Pentron) and then loaded with a steel indenter until fracture. The group findings were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance, and the medians were assessed independently using Kruskal-Wallis. The null hypothesis states that there will be no significant difference in the fracture resistance between the three CAD/CAM lithium disilicate materials and the two preparation designs.

resultsThe fracture force of CAD/CAM lithium disilicate restorations varied significantly based on the restoration design. Among the two overlays, the restorations with design A showed significantly higher fracture force than the restorations with design B (p < 0.001). Within design A: there was no significant difference between the materials. Within design B: there was a significant difference in fracture resistance between materials.

conclusionsDesign A, including more cavity depth (2 mm) related to less occlusal reduction(1.5 mm) provides more fracture resistance values than design B using lithium disilicate overlay preparation design. Preparation design has a great effect on fracture resistance values of overlay restorations, while material type has negligible effect. Despite the presence of additional virgilite crystals in CT, it did not produce any increase in fracture resistance.

Indexed as

Dental PorcelainDental Prosthesis DesignInlaysPrinting, Three-DimensionalBicuspidComputer-Aided DesignDental Cavity PreparationDental Restoration FailureDental Stress AnalysisHumansMaterials TestingDental Porcelainlithia disilicate3D printed diesCAD/CAMCNC preparationFracture resistanceLithium disilicateMinimally invasive restoration

Identifiers

PMID41622140
PMCPMC12934043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.