Effect of the Printing Angle on Flexural Strength, Microhardness, and Surface Roughness of Three-Dimensionally Printed Resin for Provisional Restorations

Nádia Vieira Queiroz; Anderson Sérgio Martins; Alberto Nogueira da Gama Antunes; Vinícius de Magalhães Barros

Authors

Nádia Vieira Queiroz
Anderson Sérgio Martins
Alberto Nogueira da Gama Antunes
Vinícius de Magalhães Barros

Keywords:

Printing, Three-Dimensional, Flexural Strength, Stereolithography

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the influence of three angles (0°, 45°, and 90°) on the mechanical properties and surface characteristics of the specimens produced by a 3D printer and resin for provisional restorations. Material and Methods: In this in vitro study, ten bars (4 × 2 × 10 mm) were produced for each experimental group (n = 10), designed in the Meshmixer software and printed on a 3D printer. The bars were tested immediately, without aging. They were subjected to a three-point bending test in a universal testing machine, and the surface roughness was measured by a contact profilometer. Microhardness was measured by a microhardness tester and the surface roughness of the specimens was evaluated with a scanning electron microscope. Results: The flexural strength of the 0° group (236.20 ± 29.73) was significantly higher than those of the 45° (155.80 ± 36.19) and 90° (138.70 ± 48.20) groups. Similarly, the surface roughness of the 0° group (0.10 ± 0.06) was significantly lower than the 45° (1.62 ± 0.55) and 90° (0.97 ± 0.22) groups. Microhardness was similar among the groups. Conclusion: The 0° angulation, with deposition of the layers on the printed object so that they are oriented perpendicular to the direction of application of forces, resulted in the best resistance to bending and lower roughness, which may contribute to better clinical behavior.

References

Oberoi G, Nitsch S, Edelmayer M, Janjić K, Müller AS, Agis H. 3D Printing-encompassing the facets of dentistry. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2018; 6:172. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2018.00172

Alexandru B, Gasparik C, Baciu S, Manole M, Dudea D, Campian R. Three-dimensional accuracy evaluation of two additive manufacturing processes in the production of dental models. Key Eng Mater 2017; 752:119-125. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.752.119

Jockusch J, Özcan M. Additive manufacturing of dental polymers: an overview on processes, materials and applications. Dent Mater J 2020; 39(3):345-354. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2019-123

Revilla-León M, Meyers MJ, Zandinejad A, Özcan M. A review on chemical composition, mechanical properties, and manufacturing work flow of additively manufactured current polymers for interim dental restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2019; 31(1):51-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12438

Shim JS, Kim JE, Jeong SH, Choi YJ, Ryu JJ. Printing accuracy, mechanical properties, surface characteristics, and microbial adhesion of 3D-printed resins with various printing orientations. J Prosthet Dent 2020; 124(4):468-475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.034

Arora A, Yadav A, Upadhyaya V, Jain P, Verma M. Comparison of marginal and internal adaptation of copings fabricated from three different fabrication techniques: an in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2018; 18(2):102-107. https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_327_17

Holmer L, Othman A, Lührs AK, von See C. Comparison of the shear bond strength of 3D printed temporary bridges materials, on different types of resin cements and surface treatment. J Clin Exp Dent 2019; 11(4):e367-372. https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.55617

Tahayeri A, Morgan M, Fugolin AP, Bompolaki D, Athirasala A, Pfeifer CS, et al. 3D printed versus conventionally cured provisional crown and bridge dental materials. Dent Mater 2018; 34(2):192-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2017.10.003

Choi SY, Habimana O, Flood P, Reynaud EG, Rodriguez BJ, Zhang N, et al. Material- and feature-dependent effects on cell adhesion to micro injection moulded medical polymers. Colloids Surfac B Biointerfac 2016; 145:46-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2016.04.032

Von Fraunhofer JA, Loewy ZG. Factors involved in microbial colonization of oral prostheses. Gen Dent 2009; 57(2):136-143; quiz 144-5.

Kattadiyil MT, Jekki R, Goodacre CJ, Baba NZ. Comparison of treatment outcomes in digital and conventional complete removable dental prosthesis fabrications in a predoctoral setting. J Prosthet Dent 2015; 114(6):818-825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.08.001

Bidra AS, Taylor TD, Agar JR. Computer-aided technology for fabricating complete dentures: systematic review of historical background, current status, and future perspectives. J Prosthet Dent 2013; 109(6):361-366. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60318-2

Simoneti DM, Pereira-Cenci T, dos Santos MBF. Comparison of material properties and biofilm formation in interim single crowns obtained by 3D printing and conventional methods. J Prosthet Dent 2022; 127(1):168-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.06.026

Khatri A. Effect of manufacturing-induced defects and orientation on the failure and fracture mechanism of 3D printed structures. Dissertation (Master Mechanical Engineering), Faculty of the Graduate School, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington. 2016.

Valenti C, Federici MI, Masciotti F, Marinucci L, Xhimitiku I, Cianetti S, et al. Mechanical properties of 3D-printed prosthetic materials compared with milled and conventional processing: a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies. J Prosthet Dent 2022; S0022-3913(22)00415-2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.06.008

Dias Resende CC, Quirino Barbosa TA, Moura GF, Piola Rizzante FA, Mendonça G, Zancopé K, et al. Cost and effectiveness of 3-dimensionally printed model using three different printing layer parameters and two resins. J Prosthet Dent 2023; 129(2):350-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.06.006

Alharbi N, Osman R, Wismeijer D. Effects of build direction on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed complete coverage interim dental restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2016; 115(6):760-767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.002

Reymus M, Fabritius R, Keßler A, Hickel R, Edelhoff D, Stawarczyk B. Fracture load of 3D-printed fixed dental prostheses compared with milled and conventionally fabricated ones: the impact of resin material, build direction, post-curing, and artificial aging—An in vitro study. Clin Oral Invest 2020; 24(2):701-710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-02952-7

Diken Turksayar AA, Donmez MB, Olcay EO, Demirel M, Demir E. Effect of printing orientation on the fracture strength of additively manufactured 3-unit interim fixed dental prostheses after aging. J Dent 2022; 124:104155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104155

Unkovskiy A, Bui PH, Schille C, Geis-Gerstorfer J, Huettig F, Spintzyk S. Objects build orientation, positioning, and curing influence dimensional accuracy and flexural properties of stereolithographically printed resin. Dent Mater 2018; 34(12):e324-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.09.011

Nold J, Wesemann C, Rieg L, Binder L, Witkowski S, Spies BC, et al. Does printing orientation matter? In-vitro fracture strength of temporary fixed dental prostheses after a 1-year simulation in the artificial mouth. Materials 2021; 14(2):259. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14020259

Park SM, Park JM, Kim SK, Heo SJ, Koak JY. Comparison of flexural strength of three-dimensional printed three-unit provisional fixed dental prostheses according to build directions. J Korean Dent Sci 2019; 12(1):13-19. https://doi.org/10.5856/JKDS.2019.12.1.13

Quirynen M, van der Mei HC, Bollen CM, Schotte A, Marechal M, Doornbusch GI, et al. An in vivo study of the influence of the surface roughness of implants on the microbiology of supra- and subgingival plaque. J Dent Res 1993; 72(9):1304-1309. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345930720090801

Mickeviciute E, Ivanauskiene E, Noreikiene V. In vitro color and roughness stability of different temporary restorative materials. Stomatologija 2016; 18(2):66-72.

Chung YJ, Park JM, Kim TH, Ahn JS, Cha HS, Lee JH. 3D printing of resin material for denture artificial teeth: Chipping and indirect tensile fracture resistance. Materials 2018; 11(10):1798. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11101798

Molinero-Mourelle P, Canals S, Gomez-Polo M, Sola-Ruiz MF, Del Rio Highsmith J, Vinuela AC. Polylactic acid as a material for three-dimensional printing of provisional restorations. Int J Prosthodont 2018; 31(4):349-350. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.5709

Puebla K, Arcaute K, Quintana R, Wicker RB. Effects of environmental conditions, aging, and build orientations on the mechanical properties of ASTM type I specimens manufactured via stereolithography. Rapid Prototyp J 2012; 18(5):374-388. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552541211250373