Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42586174›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2026

A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis to Evaluate and Compare Stress Levels and Distribution Patterns in Lithium Disilicate and Zirconia Crowns.

Ruchika U Mukherjee, Shilpa S Dandekeri, Chethan Hegde, Manoj Shetty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ruchika U MukherjeeDepartment of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, Nitte (Deemed to be University), AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences (ABSMIDS), Mangaluru, Karnataka, India.
Shilpa S DandekeriDepartment of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, Nitte (Deemed to be University), AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences (ABSMIDS), Mangaluru, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0001-7814-6067
Chethan HegdeDepartment of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, Nitte (Deemed to be University), AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences (ABSMIDS), Mangaluru, Karnataka, India.
Manoj ShettyDepartment of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, Nitte (Deemed to be University), AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences (ABSMIDS), Mangaluru, Karnataka, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This article aims to assess and compare the patterns of stress distribution and the biomechanical responses of monolithic zirconia and monolithic lithium disilicate crowns of different occlusal thicknesses using three-dimensional (3D) finite element analysis (FEA). Materials and Methods: A 3D FEA model of a mandibular first molar with all supporting structures was constructed. Eight models were developed to simulate clinically recommended preparation thicknesses for each material, including monolithic zirconia ( Results: Across all thicknesses, zirconia crowns developed higher peak internal VM stress (maximum: 456.8 MPa) but transferred less tensile stress to the underlying dentin (maximum: S ≈ 127 MPa) than lithium disilicate crowns, which transferred greater stress to the dentin (maximum: S ≈ 145.7 MPa). For both materials, non-axial loads (45 and 90 degrees) generated markedly higher stress concentrations (maximum: VM ≈ 457 MPa) than vertical loads (maximum: VM ≈ 278 MPa). Stress distribution within the lithium disilicate crown became visibly more homogeneous with increasing occlusal thickness. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this in silico model, monolithic zirconia exhibited a stress-shielding pattern in which more stress was retained within the crown and less was transmitted to the dentin, whereas lithium disilicate transmitted comparatively more stress to the dentin. Non-axial loading produced the highest stress peaks for both materials in this simulation. Because each material was modeled at the occlusal thickness clinically recommended for it, direct material-versus-material superiority cannot be inferred from these results, and clinical extrapolation should be made with caution.

Identifiers

PMID42586174
PMCPMC13623479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.