Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Oral. Health
Sec. Preventive Dentistry
Volume 5 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/froh.2024.1491984
This article is part of the Research Topic Innovative Dental Biomaterials for Advancing Oral Health Care View all 6 articles

Internal and Marginal Fits of 3D-Printed Provisional Prostheses: Comparative Effect of Different Printing Parameters

Provisionally accepted
Haidar Alalawi Haidar Alalawi Rand Aldamanhori Rand Aldamanhori Hadeel Algaoud Hadeel Algaoud Rand Alshubaili Rand Alshubaili Reem Alkhateeb Reem Alkhateeb Reem Abualsaud Reem Abualsaud Yousif A Al-Dulaijan Yousif A Al-Dulaijan Firas K Alqarawi Firas K Alqarawi Faisal D Al-Qarni Faisal D Al-Qarni Mohammed M. Gad Mohammed M. Gad *
  • Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    The influence of printing parameters on the marginal and internal fit of threedimensional (3D) printed interim fixed partial dentures (IFPDs) has been understudied. This investigation sought to elucidate the impact of printing orientation and post-curing time on these critical factors. Methods: A total of 260 3-Unit IFDPs were printed using two different resins (130/NextDent C&B MFH and 130/ASIGA DentaTOOTH). For each material, specimens were printed with three different angulations (0-, 45-, and 90-degree in relation to the z-axis). Each was further divided into 4 groups (n=10) according to post-curing time (30-, 60-, 90-, and 120min), while the green state (GS) group at 0-degree remained without post-curing as a control.Each specimen was scanned and then superimposed on the original CAD file. The marginal and internal fit of premolar and molar restorations were evaluated using the silicone replica technique. Digital scanning of the master die, both with and without a fit checker, was followed by data superimposition to compare the master die with the fit checker of each sample. 3D comparisons were conducted using initial and best-fit alignment methods, and the root mean square error (RMS) was calculated to quantify marginal and internal fit at each abutment and for the overall restoration. Statistical analysis was performed using JMP® software (JMP®, Version 16, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA, 1989-2022) with a significance level 0.05 for all tests.Results: For the ASIGA group, 0-degree orientation generally exhibited better fit than 45-and 90-degree orientations, with some variations based on post-cure time. For marginal fit, ASIGA crowns typically showed better results with 90-degree orientation, while NextDent crowns demonstrated consistent performance across orientations. Post-curing time also influenced marginal fit, with longer durations generally resulting in improved outcomes. Conclusion: With different printing orientations and post-curing times, ASIGA and NextDent resins can produce IFDPs with acceptable internal and marginal fit. However, NextDent resin consistently outperformed ASIGA in terms of overall fit. Further research is needed to evaluate the long-term clinical performance of these materials.

    Keywords: 3D printing, Provisional restorations, Fixed dental prostheses, accuracy, Printing parameters

    Received: 05 Sep 2024; Accepted: 02 Dec 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Alalawi, Aldamanhori, Algaoud, Alshubaili, Alkhateeb, Abualsaud, Al-Dulaijan, Alqarawi, Al-Qarni and Gad. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Mohammed M. Gad, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.