MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399009719 · doi:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2024.106601

The physical-mechanical properties of 3D-printed versus conventional milled zirconia for dental clinical applications: A systematic review with meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4399009719 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohammed Ahmed Alghauli, Ahmed Yaseen Alqutaibi, Sebastian Wille, Matthias Kern

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials/Journal of mechanical behavior of biomedical materials · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental materials and restorations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCubic zirconiaMaterials scienceMeta-analysisComposite materialDentistryMedicineCeramic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM OF STUDY: This systematic review aimed to compare the physical-mechanical properties of 3D-printed (additively manufactured (AM)) zirconia compared to conventionally milled (subtractive manufactured: SM) zirconia specimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A thorough search of Internet databases was conducted up to September 2023. The search retrieved studies that evaluated AM zirconia specimens and restorations regarding the physical-mechanical properties and mechanical behavior of zirconia. The main topic focused on 3Y-TZP. However, records of 4YSZ and 5YSZ were also included to gather more comprehensive evidence on additively manufactured zirconia ceramic. The quality of studies was assessed using the ROB2 tool, Newcastle Ottawa scale, and the Modified Consort Statement. Of 1736 records, 57 were assessed for eligibility, and 38 records were included in this review, only two clinical trials meet the inclusion criteria and 36 records were laboratory studies. There were no signs of mechanical complications and wear to antagonists with short-term clinical observation. SM thin specimens ≤1.5 mm showed statistically significant higher flexural strength than AM zirconia (p ≤ 0.01), while thicker specimens showed comparable outcomes (p > 0.5). The fracture resistance of dental restorations was dependent on the aging protocol, restoration type, and thickness. The bond strength of veneering ceramic to zirconia core was comparable. CONCLUSIONS: The results pooled from two short-term clinical trials showed no signs of mechanical or biological complications of additively manufactured 3Y-TZP zirconia crowns. The flexural strength might depend on the specimens' thickness, but it showed promising results to be used in clinical applications, taking into account the printing technique and orientation, material composition (yttria content), solid loading, and sintering parameters. 3D-printed restorations fracture resistance improved when adhered to human teeth. The veneering ceramic bond was comparable to milled zirconia specimens. Long-term RCTs are recommended to confirm the mechanical behavior of 3D-printed restorations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.696
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.012
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.107
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials/Journal of mechanical behavior of biomedical materialsSame topicDental materials and restorationsFrench-language works237,207