Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42034833›Full record

ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2026

Surface and fracture properties of lithium disilicate and resin-Matrix CAD/CAM ceramics.

Ayat G Montaser, Sara Tamimi, Shimaa A El Saeed, Ahmed D Abogabal, Ahmed Y Allam, Suad M Hassan, Sally N El Adawy, Amany H Elzoka

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ayat G MontaserCrowns and Bridges Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls, Al Azhar Universit, Cairo, Egypt.
Sara TamimiCrowns and Bridges Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls, Al Azhar Universit, Cairo, Egypt.
Shimaa A El SaeedDental Biomaterials Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls, Al Azhar Universit, Cairo, Egypt. shimaasaeed6442@gmail.com.
Ahmed D AbogabalDepartment of Biomaterials, Faculty of Dental Medicine (Boys), Al-Azhar University, Assiut, Egypt.
Ahmed Y AllamCrowns and Bridges Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine (Boys), Assiut, Al-Azhar University, Egypt., Assiut, Egypt.
Suad M HassanCrowns and Bridges Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls, Al Azhar Universit, Cairo, Egypt.
Sally N El AdawyCrowns and Bridges Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls, Al Azhar Universit, Cairo, Egypt.
Amany H ElzokaDental Biomaterials Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine for Girls, Al Azhar Universit, Cairo, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo characterize hardness and fracture toughness of ceramic CAD/CAM materials with different composition (IPS e.max CAD and MAZIC Duro) and thicknesses (1mm and 1.5mm). MATERIALS AND

methodsBlocks of CAD/CAM esthetic restorative materials (IPS e. max CAD "EC" and MAZIC Duro "MD"), forty discs were fabricated with dimensions of 10 mm × 1 mm and 10 mm × 1.5 mm. All discs were prepared using a precision cutting machine. Discs were then subjected to hardness, fracture toughness tests.

resultsData were analyzed using independent t-tests and Two-way ANOVA (p < 0.05). For hardness test, at 1 mm and 1.5mm thicknesses, MAZIC Duro (MD) recorded a not statistically significant higher mean value of hardness (459.836 ± 20.549 HV) (468.818 ± 17.574 HV) compared to IPS e.max CAD (EC) (456.596 ± 38.102 HV) (463.346 ± 11.399 HV) (p = 0.816 and p = 0.420, respectively). For fracture toughness test, at 1 mm thickness, MAZIC Duro (MD) recorded a highly statistically significant higher mean value of fracture toughness (5.360 ± 0.133 MPa) compared to IPS e.max CAD (EC) (4.744 ± 0.151 MPa) (p < 0.001). While at 1.5 mm thickness, MAZIC Duro (MD) recorded a not statistically significant higher mean value of fracture toughness (5.291 ± .089 MPa) compared to IPS e.max CAD (EC) (5.285 ± 0.330 MPa) (p = 0.956).

conclusionMAZIC Duro (MD) showed slightly higher hardness than IPS e.max CAD (EC) at both 1 mm and 1.5 mm thicknesses, but the difference was not statistically significant. For fracture toughness, MD was highly significant at 1 mm thickness, while at 1.5 mm, both materials performed similarly with no significant difference.

Indexed as

Fracture toughnessHardnessIPS e.max CADMaterial thicknessesMAZIC Duro

Identifiers

PMID42034833
PMCPMC13110258

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.