SynthesisBMC oral health2026
The effect of build orientation on the marginal and internal fit of 3-D printed provisional fixed dental prosthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of build orientation on the marginal and internal fit of 3D-printed provisional fixed dental prostheses.
methodsElectronic searches of four databases were conducted to identify studies assessing how build orientation affects the fit of 3D-printed provisional FDPs. This review was structured and drafted based on the guidelines provided by the PRISMA. Prior to commencement, the research protocol was officially registered with PROSPERO. This review sought to answer the following PICO question: Do provisional fixed dental prostheses (P) fabricated using 3D printing at non-zero build orientations (I) demonstrate same marginal and internal fit (O) to those produced at a zero-degree build angle (C)? Quality analysis was performed using the modified CONSORT scale.
resultsThe initial search yielded a total of 931 titles. Ten studies met the selection criteria and were subjected to qualitative analysis. Four out of ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. Most of the studies possessed a moderate level of quality base on the quality analysis. The GRADE Approach, used to assess the certainty of evidence in the selected articles, reported a moderate level of certainty in the included studies.
conclusionsIn general, the specimens printed at zero degrees displayed a better internal and marginal fit, although discrepancies at other angulations were within clinically acceptable limits. Due to limited study pool of highly di-verse, the findings of this review must be viewed cautiously.
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.