ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2026
Advances in Chairside and Restorative Dental Materials: A Systematic Review of Material Properties, Adhesive Strategies, and Long-Term Performance.
Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChairside CAD/CAM technology has reshaped restorative dentistry by enabling single-visit indirect restorations fabricated from glass-ceramics, zirconia, polymer-infiltrated ceramic networks (PICN), and resin nanoceramics. Despite a rapidly growing body of evidence, no recent systematic synthesis has integrated mechanical, adhesive, ageing-related, and clinical outcomes within a unified framework.
methodsThis systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with PRISMA 2020. A structured electronic search was performed in the Web of Science Core Collection and MEDLINE via PubMed for studies published between January 2021 and May 2026. The search was complemented by Google Scholar and reference-list screening. Eligible primary studies were selected according to predefined PICOS criteria and synthesised qualitatively because methodological and outcome heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Of the 444 records initially identified, 332 were screened after duplicate removal, and 31 primary studies met all eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. Review-level publications were used only for reference-list screening and contextual comparison and did not contribute data to the synthesis.
resultsLaboratory studies indicated favourable flexural-strength profiles for lithium disilicate, advanced lithium disilicate, and Y-TZP zirconia, while PICN blocks showed comparatively favourable resistance to thermomechanical ageing. The limited available clinical evidence reported high short-term survival for chairside CAD/CAM restorations, but did not permit definitive comparisons between material classes. Across the predominantly in vitro bonding studies, hydrofluoric-acid etching followed by silanisation produced the most consistent bond-strength results for glass-ceramics, whereas Al
conclusionsMaterial selection in chairside dentistry should consider intrinsic material properties, surface-conditioning requirements, and the planned cementation strategy. Standardised laboratory protocols and adequately powered prospective clinical studies with longer follow-up are required before definitive material-specific clinical recommendations can be established, particularly for advanced lithium disilicate and multilayer zirconias.
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.