ArticleEuropean oral research2026
Effect of firings on the lithium disilicate and zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate dental ceramics for CAD-CAM procedures.
Article in European oral research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to verify the effect of multiple firing cycles on lithium disilicate and zirconia reinforced lithium silicate ceramics. Materials and Methods: Sixty discs measuring 12 mm x 1.2 mm made with IPS E.max CAD (n=30) or Vita Suprinity (n=30) ceramic systems were divided into 3 subgroups submitted to 2, 3 or 5 firing cycles (C2, C3, and C5, respectively). Surface roughness, gloss, biaxial flexural strength, and Vickers hardness were evaluated, as well as scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis. Data was submitted to two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test with a 5% significance level. Results: For surface roughness, Suprinity showed a significant decrease at C5 (p<0.05). For gloss, there was no statistical interaction and C5 showed higher gloss value for both ceramics (p>0.05). For flexural strength, Suprinity showed significant increase (p<0.05) and IPS E.max CAD decreased significantly at C5 (p<0.05). For Vickers hardness, there was no statistical interaction and hardness decreased at C5 for both ceramics (p>0.05). IPS E.max CAD showed no morphological difference while Suprinity showed micro irregularities for C5 in the SEM analysis. Conclusion: Firing cycles promoted better effect on roughness and biaxial flexural strength parameters for the Suprinity compared with IPS E.max CAD. Both ceramics showed negative effects on the morphological aspect of the crystalline matrix and similar gloss or hardness values.
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.