ArticlePolymers2026
Evaluation of Fracture Resistance in CAD-CAM Additively Manufactured Occlusal Veneers.
Article in Polymers, 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
Three-dimensional (3D) printing technology has become more and more popular in restorative dentistry; however, information regarding the mechanical properties of 3D-printed restorative materials remains limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the behavior under compressive loading until fracture of occlusal veneers fabricated from two types of 3D-printed resin composites, Saremco Print Crowntec A2 and Voco V-Print C&B Temp A2, intended for permanent and temporary clinical restorations, respectively. The study design involved scanning a first upper premolar typodont tooth, previously prepared to receive an occlusal veneer restoration, followed by the computer-aided design of the occlusal veneers and resin dies and 3D printing, resulting in 20 samples. The cemented restorations were subjected to mechanical testing using a fracture-resistance test at a speed of 5 mm/min, applied until failure. The recorded failure forces ranged between 571 and 970 Newton (N), values that are comparable to physiological masticatory forces. The absorbed energy was calculated as the area under the force-displacement curve using the trapezoidal integration method. The mean energy at failure was 0.301 Joule (J) (Voco) and 0.244 Joule (J) (Saremco), with Voco demonstrating greater toughness. In terms of fracture pattern classification, the 3D-printed resin with a lower filler content presented a more catastrophic failure mode compared with the material with a higher filler content. Fractographic analysis revealed characteristic fracture patterns and failure-specific features. Higher predictability and greater fracture strength were observed for the low-filled material, as indicated by the Weibull analysis.
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.