PURPOSE This in-vitro study evaluated and compared the color stability of 3D-printed and conventional heat-polymerized acrylic resins following aging, mechanical brushing, and immersion in staining medium. MATERIALS AND METHODS Forty disc-shaped specimens (10 mm in diameter and 3 mm thick) were prepared from two 3D-printed [DentaBASE (DB) and Denture 3D+ (D3D)] and one conventional polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) denture materials. The specimens were thermo-cycled, subjected to mechanical brushing, and were immersed in either coffee, lemon juice, coke, or artificial saliva (AS) to simulate one and two years of oral use. Color measurements of the specimens were recorded by a spectrophotometer at baseline (T0), and after one (T1) and two years (T2) of simulation. The color changes (∆E) were determined and also quantified according to the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) units. Descriptive statistics, followed by factorial ANOVA and Bonferroni post-hoc test (α=.05), were applied for data analysis. RESULTS The independent factors, namely material, staining medium, and immersion time, and interaction among these factors significantly influenced ∆E ( P <.009). Irrespective of the materials, treatments, and time, the highest and the lowest mean ∆Es were observed for PMMA in lemon juice (4.58 ± 1.30) and DB in AS (0.41 ± 0.18), respectively. Regarding the material type, PMMA demonstrated the highest mean ∆E (2.31 ± 1.37), followed by D3D (1.67 ± 0.66), and DB (0.85 ± 0.52), and the difference in ∆E between the materials were statistically significant ( P <.001). All the specimens demonstrated a decreased color changes at T2 compared to T1, and this difference in mean ∆E was statistically significant ( P <.001). CONCLUSION The color changes of 3D-printed denture resins were low compared to conventional heat polymerized PMMA. All the tested materials, irrespective of the staining medium used, demonstrated a significant decrease in ∆E values over time.
BACKGROUND: The use of 3D printed material in the dental field is gaining tremendous attention. However, studies related to 3D printed denture resins are scarce and need consideration before their inclusion in routine clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the surface roughness (Ra) of 3D printed denture resins following aging and mechanical brushing. METHODS: Forty round samples (diameter, 10 mm and thickness, 3 mm) were fabricated from two 3D printed (DentaBASE and Denture 3D+) and one conventional polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) denture materials. The samples were thermo-cycled, subjected to mechanical brushing, and later immersed in either artificial saliva (AS), coffee, cola, or lemon juice (n= 10) to simulate one and two years of oral use. Surface roughness (Ra) was determined using a non-contact profilometer and scanning electron microscope was used for qualitative analysis. The data was analyzed using SPSS v.20 (α= 0.05). RESULTS: Denture 3D+ demonstrated highest mean Ra (1.15 ± 0.28 μm), followed by PMMA (0.99 ± 0.50 μm) and DentaBASE (0.81 ± 24). The difference in mean Ra between the materials was statistically non-significant (P= 0.08). Amongst the different beverages used, the highest Ra was observed for samples immersed in lemon juice (1.06 ± 0.40 μm) followed by cola (1.04 ± 0.46 μm) and coffee (0.98 ± 0.40 μm), respectively. The lowest Ra was observed for samples immersed in AS (0.85 ± 0.24 μm). CONCLUSION: The surface roughness of 3D printed denture resins was comparable with that of conventional PMMA resins. Denture 3D+ demonstrated the highest mean roughness, followed by PMMA and DentaBASE.
This study assessed the efficacy of five denture cleansers on the microbial adherence and surface topography of conventional and CAD/CAM denture base resins. Acrylic resin discs were fabricated using conventional, milling, and 3D printing methods (N = 180). The discs were contaminated with dual species of Candida albicans and Streptococcus mutans biofilm for 72 h and then disinfected with either of the denture cleansers (Fittydent cleansing tablets, 2% Chlorhexidine gluconate, 0.2% Chlorhexidine gluconate, 0.5% sodium hypochlorite, and 1% sodium hypochlorite (n = 10). Distilled water served as the control group. The colony-forming units of the microorganisms were calculated, followed by post-treatment surface roughness. Data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA, paired t-test, and post hoc Tukey HSD test (α = 0.05). Among the denture cleansers, 2% Chlorhexidine gluconate, 0.5% sodium hypochlorite, and 1% sodium hypochlorite had the best cleansing effect on the resin discs and demonstrated zero growth of colonies for both the species. Comparing the material groups, the 3D-processed discs showed higher colony-forming units followed by the conventional and CAD/CAM milled group. The highest surface roughness was demonstrated by the 3D-printed discs (0.690 ± 0.08 μm), followed by the conventional (0.493 ± 0.11 μm) and the milled groups (0.301 ± 0.08 μm). The tested chemical denture cleansers affected the Candida albicans and Streptococcus mutans adhesion compared to control discs immersed in distilled water. The clinician may recommend to their patient to use 2% chlorhexidine gluconate for the disinfection of CAD/CAM PMMA denture base materials.
This study assesses the retreatability of TotalFill bioceramic (TFBC) and AH Plus (AHP) sealers and their impact on retreatment force and torque. Twenty-six premolar teeth with single oval canals were instrumented, obturated using the matched gutta-percha cone technique with one of the tested sealers, and then temporized. After a 6-month incubation at 37 °C and 100% humidity, the canals were retreated with the XP Shaper system. During retreatment, the generated force and torque were measured. Micro-CT scanning was run before and after the retreatment procedure to analyze the remaining obturating materials in the canals. The apically directed maximum force in AHP was higher than that in TFBC. The coronally directed maximum force and the maximum torque were comparable between the groups. A higher amount of remaining obturating materials was found in the AHP compared to that in the TFBC. Based on these findings, endodontic sealer had an influence on retreatability, and the TFBC showed less remaining obturating materials and lower retreatment forces in the apical direction compared to the AHP in extracted teeth with oval canals.
This study investigated retreatment of oval canals filled with gutta-percha and different sealers using WaveOne Gold (WOG). Single oval canals were prepared to size 30, 0.04 and obturated with gutta percha and AH Plus (AHP) or TotalFill bioceramic (TFBC) sealer. After 6-month incubation, the canals were retreated with WOG Primary (25, 0.07) under simulated body temperature, and the developed load and torque were simultaneously measured. The time and regaining the apical patency were checked. Micro-computed tomography scanning was performed to calculate the remaining obturating materials. An independent t-test and chi-square test were performed at a 95% confidence level. A shorter retreatment time was needed in TFBC than in AHP (P = 0.003). However, a higher maximum apical load was reported with AHP (P = 0.000). Meanwhile, comparable maximum coronal load and maximum torque values were observed. Apical patency was regained in all TFBC roots and only 75% of the AHP samples (P = 0.217). The remaining obturating materials were comparable in TFBC (13.02 ± 8.12%) and AHP (10.11 ± 8.46%) (P = 0.398). WOG was able to remove 89.89% and 86.98% of obturating materials in TFBC and AHP, respectively. The TFBC presented lower apical loads and faster retreatment compared to AHP.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.