No abstract

Objectives: To compare the marginal and internal fit and fracture resistance of three-unit provisional fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) fabricated by additive, subtractive, and conventional methods. Material and Methods: Eighty 3-unit FDPs were fabricated on metal dies of the maxillary right second premolar and second molar by four different techniques (n = 20):The direct method by using autopolymerizing polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), indirect method by the compression molding technique, subtractive manufacturing by using PMMA blocks, and additive manufacturing by using digital light processing technology.The adaptation of restorations at the marginal, axial, cuspal, and fossa areas was assessed by using the silicone replica technique. After thermocycling and cyclic loading, the fracture resistance was measured by a universal testing machine. Data were analyzed by a twoway analysis of variance (ANOVA), ANOVA, and Tukey test (α = .05). Results:The mean gap measured in the additive group was lower than that in all other groups at all points (p < .05); however, the difference in the marginal gap with the subtractive group was not significant (p = .995). The mean marginal and axial gaps in the subtractive group were significantly lower than the corresponding values in both conventional groups (p < .05). A significant difference existed between all groups regarding the mean cuspal and fossa gaps (p < .05). The mean fracture resistance of the additive group was significantly higher than that of indirect (p = .018) and direct (p < .001) groups, and the fracture resistance of the subtractive group was significantly higher than that of the direct group (p = .020). Conclusion:The digitally fabricated provisional FDPs showed superior marginal and internal fit and higher fracture resistance than the conventionally fabricated FDPs.Between the digital methods, the additive technique yielded superior internal fit.

No abstract

Aim: To assess the effect of different mechanical surface treatments on flexural strength of repaired denture base. Material and Methods: Sixty bar-shaped specimens of heat-polymerized acrylic resin were fabricated, and divided into six groups (n=10). All specimens, except the positive control group (group PC), were sectioned into halves to create a 1-mm clearance. A negative control group with no surface treatment (group NC) was also considered. Other groups underwent different surface treatments: group Laser; treated with erbium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser, group APA; airborne-particle abrasion (APA), group APA plus Laser; a combination of laser and APA, and group Bur; bur grinding. After measuring surface roughness (Ra) with a profilometer, all sectioned specimens were repaired by auto-polymerizing acrylic resin, and thermocycled afterward. Three-point bending test was performed by a universal testing machine. Data were statistically analyzed (α=0.05). Results: The mean surface roughness of all experimental groups were significantly higher than that of group NC (p<0.05). The mean flexural strength of all groups was significantly lower than that of group PC (p<0.05). Group B had significantly higher flexural strength than the other surface-treated groups (p<0.05). Group Laser had significantly higher flexural strength than groups APA (p=0.043) and APA plus Laser (p=0.023). No significant difference was found between groups APA and APA plus Laser (p=0.684). Conclusion: All surface treatments increased the surface roughness and flexural strength compared with the untreated group. The highest flexural strength was observed in specimens treated by bur grinding and then laser, however, it was still significantly lower than intact specimens.