ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Comparative evaluation of marginal gaps of lithium disilicate crowns measured using stereomicroscopy and micro‑computed tomography.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study compared the marginal gaps of CAD-CAM lithium disilicate (LDS) crowns measured using two-dimensional (stereomicroscopy) and three-dimensional (micro-computed tomography) instruments at 12 and 360 measurement points. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty-four typodont model lower left first molars were prepared for LDS crowns by undergraduate dental students in a dental simulation clinic. An LDS crown was constructed for each preparation using a Trios 3 scanner / Sirona inLab MC X5 milling unit at a cement space of 100 μm. Each crown was placed onto its corresponding original tooth preparation, and the marginal gap was measured using stereomicroscopy and micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) at 12 and 360 selected measurement points. The mean marginal gap (MMG) was calculated using each measurement method.
resultsThe MMG measured by stereomicroscopy was 82.54 μm with 12 measurement points and 85.74 μm with 360 measurement points. For micro-CT, the MMG was 96.56 μm with 12 points and 89.83 μm with 360 points. A two-way repeated-measures ANOVA demonstrated no significant main effect of measurement instrument (F₁,₂₃ = 0.35, p = 0.56, ηp² = 0.015) and no significant main effect of measurement density (F₁,₂₃ = 1.24, p = 0.28, ηp² = 0.051). There was no significant interaction between measurement instrument and measurement density (F₁,₂₃ = 0.87, p = 0.36, ηp² = 0.036).
conclusionsNo statistically significant differences in MMG measurements were detected between stereomicroscopy and micro‑CT for LDS crowns under the present in vitro conditions. The number of measurements made did not significantly influence the marginal gap values obtained using either measurement instrument. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The marginal accuracy of LDS restorations is critical for long-term clinical success. Assessing in vitro crown marginal gap using stereomicroscopy and micro-computed tomography provided comparable marginal gap measurements irrespective of the number of measurement points. Extending marginal gap measurements to in vivo studies is essential to substantiate clinical observations.
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.