Kunnath Menon Rohit, Yew Hui Xin, Chen Tze Wei Benjamin, Mohammed Ramadan Farah, Ibrahim Soliman Afraa, Veettil Sajesh
College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman, United Arab Emirates.
School of Dentistry, IMU University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Front Dent Med. 2025 Aug 11;6:1638794. doi: 10.3389/fdmed.2025.1638794. eCollection 2025.
Scientific evidence from studies comparing the mechanical properties of dentures fabricated with computer-aided design-computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) and conventional techniques is inconclusive. This systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to analyze the current evidence comparing the mechanical properties of conventional and digitally fabricated denture bases from studies.
A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Medline for studies from inception until 16 January 2025. The review had been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO: CRD42024531425). A network meta-analysis compared conventional and digitally fabricated denture bases' flexural strength, hardness, flexural modulus, elastic modulus, impact strength, fracture toughness, yield point, and toughness. Risk of bias was assessed by using RoBDEMAT (RoB 2.0).
4,994 articles were identified, 966 duplicates were removed, 3,971 were excluded by title and abstract screening, 57 were assessed by full-text reading, and 42 were included in the quantitative synthesis. As per the sensitivity analysis performed after excluding low-quality studies, the network meta-analysis results indicate that milled digital denture bases exhibit higher flexural strength [SMD = 2.13 (95% CI: 0.21, 4.05)] compared to 3D-printed digitally fabricated denture bases. Bias incorporated from higher values from one study diminishes the quality of evidence for impact strength and flexural modulus.
Milled digital denture bases exhibit superior flexural strength to 3D-printed and conventionally fabricated denture bases under laboratory conditions. High-quality studies are recommended to provide conclusive evidence for other mechanical properties.
PROSPERO CRD42024531425.
关于比较采用计算机辅助设计-计算机辅助制造（CAD-CAM）技术与传统技术制作的义齿力学性能的研究，其科学证据尚无定论。本系统评价及荟萃分析旨在分析现有证据，比较传统制作和数字化制作的义齿基托的力学性能。
在PubMed、Scopus和Medline数据库中进行系统检索，纳入自数据库创建至2025年1月16日的研究。本评价已在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库PROSPERO注册：CRD42024531425。采用网络荟萃分析比较传统制作和数字化制作的义齿基托的弯曲强度、硬度、弯曲模量、弹性模量、冲击强度、断裂韧性、屈服点和韧性。采用RoBDEMAT（RoB 2.0）评估偏倚风险。
共识别出4994篇文章，排除966篇重复文章，通过标题和摘要筛选排除3971篇，通过全文阅读评估57篇，42篇纳入定量合成分析。排除低质量研究后进行的敏感性分析结果显示，网络荟萃分析结果表明，与3D打印数字化制作的义齿基托相比，铣削数字化义齿基托具有更高的弯曲强度[标准化均数差（SMD）=2.13（95%可信区间：（0.21，4.05）]。一项研究中较高数值带来的偏倚降低了冲击强度和弯曲模量证据的质量。
在实验室条件下，铣削数字化义齿基托的弯曲强度优于3D打印和传统制作的义齿基托。建议开展高质量研究以提供关于其他力学性能的确凿证据。
PROSPERO CRD42024531425
