ArticlePloS one2026
Biaxial strength under fatigue of 4YSZ: Surface treatment and resin cement viscosity effects.
Article in PloS one, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the effect of different surface treatments combined with high- or low-viscosity resin cements on the biaxial flexural strength of 4YSZ ceramics. Discs of 4YSZ (IPS e.max ZirCAD MT, Ivoclar AG; 15 mm diameter, 1.2 mm thickness) were prepared, subjected to CAD/CAM milling simulation using #220 silicon carbide papers, and divided into 10 groups according to two factors: "Surface Treatment" - Control (CTRL, no treatment); air abrasion with 45 µm (AB45) or 110 µm (AB110) alumina oxide particles; and glaze either followed (GLZ + HF) or not (GLZ) by 10% hydrofluoric acid; and "Resin Cement Viscosity" - High (H) or Low (L). The discs were treated, luted with resin cement, and subjected to two monotonic tests (n = 2) to determine fatigue parameters, followed by biaxial fatigue testing (n = 15; piston-on-three-balls; 20 Hz; 10,000 cycles; initial stress: 75 MPa; increments of 25 MPa). Topography, fractography, and surface roughness analyses were also performed. Surface treatment significantly influenced fatigue performance (p < 0.05, F = 60.25), whereas resin cement viscosity and its interaction with surface treatment did not show significant effects (p > 0.05, F = 0.86; p > 0.05, F = 0.07). The GLZ groups exhibited the highest flexural strength (H/L-GLZ: 382-396 MPa), followed by intermediate values in CTRL (H/L-CTRL: 285-288 MPa), AB45 (H/L-AB45: 310-315 MPa), and GLZ + HF (H/L: 273-280 MPa), while AB110 groups presented the lowest strength (H/L: 205-210 MPa). Surface roughness was lower for GLZ (Ra: 1.44 µm) and GLZ + HF (Ra: 1.38 µm) compared to AB45 (Ra: 1.83 µm) and AB110 (Ra: 1.69 µm). GLZ produced smooth and homogeneous surfaces, GLZ + HF led to areas partially exposed by acid, and AB110 caused more pronounced surface defects than AB45. Hence, the GLZ treatment offered superior fatigue performance; AB45 and GLZ + HF showed behavior similar to CTRL, whereas AB110 impaired mechanical performance. Resin cement viscosity had no significant influence on fatigue strength.
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.