ArticleJournal of Indian Prosthodontic Society2026
Comparative evaluation of 2-step and 3-step polishing systems on the surface roughness and flexural strength of lithium disilicate: An in vitro study.
Article in Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the effects of 2-step and 3-step polishing systems on the surface roughness and biaxial flexural strength of lithium disilicate ceramics after grinding. SETTINGS AND
designThirty-two 14 x 1.25 mm lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD) discs were divided into four groups ( n = 8): control (unmodified), ground-unpolished, ground-3-step polished (Shofu Zil Master), and ground-2-step polished (Toboom). A profilometer was used to quantify the surface roughness (Ra, µm), and ISO 6872 was followed to calculate the biaxial flexural strength (MPa). MATERIALS AND
methodsA profilometer was used to quantify the surface roughness (Ra, µm), and ISO 6872 was followed to calculate the biaxial flexural strength (MPa) of all the samples. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The data were analyzed through the IBM SPSS Statistics software package (Version 25.0). One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to check variations among the groups followed by the Tukey's post hoc test (α=.05).
resultsThere were significant differences between the groups in both flexural strength and surface roughness ( P <.001). As compared to the control, the 3-step system (0.43 ± 0.21 µm) provided smoother surfaces than the 2-step system (0.78 ± 0.34 µm). The control group (1696.8 ± 486.9 MPa) and the 3-step group (1500.0 ± 306.2 MPa) had the highest flexural strength, whereas the 2-step group (951.3 ± 121.2 MPa) had the lowest values.
conclusionsThe flexural strength and surface roughness of ground lithium disilicate were enhanced by both polishing systems; however, the 3-step system performed better and produced outcomes that were on par with unaltered ceramics.
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.