No abstract

Although 3D-printing is common in dentistry, the technique does not produce the required quality for all target applications. Resin type, printing resolution, positioning, alignment, target structure, and the type and number of support structures may influence the surface roughness of printed objects, and this study investigates the effects of these variables. A stereolithographic data record was generated from a master model. Twelve printing processes were executed with a stereolithography Desktop 3D Printer, including models aligned across and parallel to the printer front as well as solid and hollow models. Three layer thicknesses were used, and in half of all processes, the models were inclined at 15°. For comparison, eight gypsum models and milled polyurethane models were manufactured. The mean roughness index of each model was determined with a perthometer. Surface roughness values were approximately 0.65 µm (master), 0.87–4.44 µm (printed), 2.32–2.57 µm (milled), 1.72–1.86 µm (cast plaster/alginate casting), and 0.98–1.03 µm (cast plaster/polyether casting). The layer height and type and number of support structures influenced the surface roughness of printed models (p ≤ 0.05), but positioning, structure, and alignment did not.

Telescopic crowns with additional retention elements were more resistant to wearing than double crowns without additional retention elements. An additional clinical benefit might be the quick and easy possibility of enhancing retention.

Removable implant-anchored dentures have become an established treatment concept especially for older, multimorbid patients. This study investigates the retention force (RF) of two different attachment systems. A total of 96 specimens (n = 8 for each condition) were fabricated and RF was measured under different conditions: fatigue (10,000 cycles dislodging), thermal undulation (5/55 °C, 5000 cycles) and implant-angulation (0°, 5°, 10°, 15°, 20°). The Novaloc system ((N), 0° and 15° abutments, yellow matrix (Y)) was compared to the Locator system ((L), pink (P) and orange (O)). Initial RFs (8.57 ± 0.99 N (NY), 19.39 ± 8.10 N (LP), 8.8 ± 5.28 N (LO)) were reduced by ageing simulation (26% (NY), 66% (LP), 89% (LO); p < 0.001). After thermocycling, Novaloc’s RFs decreased by 33% (p < 0.001) while the Locators’ RFs increased by 34% (LP: p = 0.002, LO: p = 0.148). In contrast to LP, the RFs of Novaloc abutments and LOs predominantly showed no clinically relevant dependence on implant angulation. Ageing processes tended to result in lower RFs at higher implant angulation. Thus, the Novaloc attachment system offers an alternative to Locator attachments. It is characterized by a comparatively continuous RF-curve over the entire wearing period. Future clinical studies have to be conducted to verify the in vitro demonstrated advantages of the Novaloc system.

Low-retentive PVS attachments could be a treatment option if reduced denture retention is required and/or if angulated implants are in place. Clinical studies are necessary to evaluate the materials' durability under oral conditions.