Abstract:The purpose of this research was to compare the accuracy of threedimensionally (3D) printed post and core fabricated with two different materials: reinforced wax and castable resin.
Materials and methods:Fifteen extracted single root central incisors were selected. Root canal treatment and tooth preparation for crown were performed on all teeth. Eleven millimeters post space was created with standardized prefabricated fiber post drill. Polyvinylsiloxane impression material was used for root canal impressions. … Show more
“…The same authors also compared the accuracy of reinforced printed wax and castable resin and found that both showed a volume reduction from the original file. 68 Three in vitro studies compared the accuracy of 3D-printed composite resin fixed single prostheses, such as crowns or inlays, to milled ones. Two studies showed superior overall fit and marginal fit for DLP 3D-printed crowns 69 and inlays, 70 respectively.…”
The aim of this scoping review is to categorize 3D-printing applications of polymeric materials into those where there is evidence to support their clinical application and to list the clinical applications that require a greater evidence base or further development before adoption. Materials and Methods: An electronic search on PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus (Elsevier), and Cochrane Library databases was conducted, including articles written in English and published between January 2003 and September 2023. The search terms were: ((3D printing) OR (3-dimensional printing) OR (three dimensional printing) OR (additive manufacturing)) AND ((polymer) OR (resin)) AND (dent*). Case reports, in vitro, in situ, ex vivo, or clinical trials focused on applications of 3D printing with polymers in dentistry were included. Review articles, systematic reviews, and articles comparing material properties without investigation on clinical application and performance/ accuracy were excluded. Results: The search provided 3,070 titles, and 969 were duplicates and removed. A total of 2,101 records were screened during the screening phase, and 1,628 records were excluded based on title/abstract. In the eligibility phase, of the 473 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 254 articles were excluded. During the inclusion phase, a total of 219 studies were included in qualitative synthesis. Conclusions: There is lack of clinical evidence for the use of 3D-printing technologies in dentistry. Current evidence, when investigating clinical outcomes only, would indicate non-inferiority of 3D-printed polymeric materials for applications including diagnostic models, temporary prostheses, custom trays, and positioning/ surgical guides/stents.
“…The same authors also compared the accuracy of reinforced printed wax and castable resin and found that both showed a volume reduction from the original file. 68 Three in vitro studies compared the accuracy of 3D-printed composite resin fixed single prostheses, such as crowns or inlays, to milled ones. Two studies showed superior overall fit and marginal fit for DLP 3D-printed crowns 69 and inlays, 70 respectively.…”
The aim of this scoping review is to categorize 3D-printing applications of polymeric materials into those where there is evidence to support their clinical application and to list the clinical applications that require a greater evidence base or further development before adoption. Materials and Methods: An electronic search on PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus (Elsevier), and Cochrane Library databases was conducted, including articles written in English and published between January 2003 and September 2023. The search terms were: ((3D printing) OR (3-dimensional printing) OR (three dimensional printing) OR (additive manufacturing)) AND ((polymer) OR (resin)) AND (dent*). Case reports, in vitro, in situ, ex vivo, or clinical trials focused on applications of 3D printing with polymers in dentistry were included. Review articles, systematic reviews, and articles comparing material properties without investigation on clinical application and performance/ accuracy were excluded. Results: The search provided 3,070 titles, and 969 were duplicates and removed. A total of 2,101 records were screened during the screening phase, and 1,628 records were excluded based on title/abstract. In the eligibility phase, of the 473 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, 254 articles were excluded. During the inclusion phase, a total of 219 studies were included in qualitative synthesis. Conclusions: There is lack of clinical evidence for the use of 3D-printing technologies in dentistry. Current evidence, when investigating clinical outcomes only, would indicate non-inferiority of 3D-printed polymeric materials for applications including diagnostic models, temporary prostheses, custom trays, and positioning/ surgical guides/stents.
“…restoration boundaries, often leading to inadequate tooth structure reinforcement. 8 Furthermore, prefabricated fiber posts present clinical limitations, including bonding failures and adaptation challenges, 9 especially in elliptical root canals. 10 The gap between the dentin and these posts can result in an uneven resin cement layer, causing increased polymerization shrinkage, stress, and eventual post failure.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…10 The gap between the dentin and these posts can result in an uneven resin cement layer, causing increased polymerization shrinkage, stress, and eventual post failure. 6,9,10 The dearth of comprehensive data pertaining to the optimal material and dimensions for post cores has prompted scholarly investigation into novel materials within this domain. According to existing literature, custom-cast posts and cores have been found to exhibit enhanced adaptation in comparison to prefabricated posts.…”
This study investigated the impact of common surface pretreatments on the contact angle (CA), surface free energy (SFE), and push-out bond strength (PBS) of custom 3D-printed resin posts. Materials and Methods: Post spaces of 60 endodontically treated mandibular premolars were prepared. Custom 3D-printed posts made from permanent crown resin were fabricated for 50 randomly selected post spaces. The specimens were then divided into six groups (n = 10) based on their surface pretreatment methods. These methods included sandblasting (SB), silane (SL), hydrofluoric acid (HF), and hydrogen peroxide (HP). Additionally, two control groups were established: glass fiber control (GFC) and permanent resin control (PRC). CA and SFE were measured for each 3D-printed post group. PBS and failure mode analyses were conducted. The data were analyzed using the two-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey post hoc test (α = .05). Results: The lowest CA values were found in the SB and SL groups. The SB group had the highest SFE compared to all other groups. SL markedly enhanced the PBS of the resin post compared to the PRC at the cervical, middle, and apical levels (P = .001, P = .000, and P = .002, respectively), and the values were comparable to those of the GFC (P = .695, P = .999, and P = .992, respectively). Except in the GFC, SB, and SL groups, mixed failure decreased from the cervical to apical levels, while adhesive failure rates increased. Conclusions: The application of silane and sandblasting to the surfaces of custom 3D-printed resin posts effectively increased their SFE, thereby enhancing their adhesion.
“…6 Using new technologies and materials to fabricate customized post and core has been evaluated in the literature. [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) subtractive and additive manufacturing (AM) can be used to manufacture custom post and cores. 15 Subtractive methods cause waste of raw materials and require sustainability and precision of milling tools.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using new technologies and materials to fabricate customized post and core has been evaluated in the literature 7‐14 . Computer‐aided design and computer‐aided manufacturing (CAD‐CAM) subtractive and additive manufacturing (AM) can be used to manufacture custom post and cores 15 .…”
PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the print orientation of direct metal laser sintering (DMLS) posts and cores on the fracture resistance and failure patterns of endodontically treated mandibular premolar teeth.Materials and MethodsSixty intact human mandibular premolars were endodontically treated. The teeth were then randomly divided into four groups (n = 15). Cobalt‐chromium (Co‐Cr) metal posts were fabricated by traditional casting (Group C), and DMLS method in 0‐, 45‐ and, 90‐degree print orientations (Group DMLS 0, Group DMLS 45, and Group DMLS 90). The posts and cores were cemented with composite resin cement and subjected to compression test at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Data was analyzed by using one‐way analysis of variance ANOVA and multiple comparison post hoc Tukey tests (α = .05). Specimens were viewed under a stereo microscope with x20 magnification for evaluating the fracture types.ResultsNo significant differences were found among the groups tested in terms of fracture resistance (P>0.05). Group C and Group DMLS 0 group exhibited similar fracture patterns.ConclusionsIt is possible to produce post and core restorations with the DMLS technique and use them clinically. Print orientation did not influence the fracture resistance. However, fracture patterns were different. Group C outperformed all DMLS groups in terms of fracture patterns.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved
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.