Mechanical Aspects Of 3D-Printed Resin for the Fabrication of Provisional Restorations: an Integrative Literature Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21270/archi.v14i8.6604Keywords:
Dental Prosthesis, 3D Printing, Polymers, Flexural ResistanceAbstract
Introduction: Temporary dental prostheses must exhibit mechanical strength, wear resistance, biocompatibility, and acceptable esthetics for clinical use. There is a variety of materials available with different chemical compositions, requiring evaluation of clinical performance and patient cost. Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA)-based resins show inferior mechanical behavior compared to digital resins, such as those milled via CAD-CAM or 3D printed. Objective: To integratively review the literature regarding the mechanical properties of 3D-printed resins for provisional restorations. Material and Method: The review was based on the PICO strategy. Article searches were conducted from May to October 2023 in BVS, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct, using descriptors, synonyms, and terms in titles and abstracts, plus manual reference checks. Inclusion criteria were in vivo, in vitro, or in silico studies comparing the mechanical performance of 3D-printed and conventional resins in fixed provisional prostheses. Exclusion criteria included studies without such comparison, studies on other types or uses of resin, and reviews, opinion pieces, or case reports. Results: Four in vitro studies were included, all with low scientific evidence. The findings were inconsistent: in some, 3D-printed resin was mechanically superior; in others, it was inferior. Conclusion: The literature review yielded inconclusive results regarding the mechanical superiority of 3D-printed resins over conventional ones.
Downloads
References
1. 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):168–72.
2. Myagmar G, Lee JH, Ahn JS, Yeo ISL, Yoon HI, Han JS. Wear of 3D printed and CAD/CAM milled interim resin materials after chewing simulation. J Adv Prosthodont. 2021;13(3):144–51.
3. Berli C, Thieringer FM, Sharma N, Muller JA, Dedem P, Fisher J, et al. Comparing the mechanical properties of pressed, milled, and 3D-printed resins for occlusal devices. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;124(6):780–6.
4. Park SM, Park JM, Kim SK, Heo SJ, Koak JY. Flexural strength of 3D-printing resin materials for provisional fixed dental prostheses. Materials (Basel). 2020;13(18):3970.
5. Kim N, Kim H, Kim IH, Lee J, Lee KE, Lee HS, et al. Novel 3D printed resin crowns for primary molars: In vitro study of fracture resistance, biaxial flexural strength, and dynamic mechanical analysis. Children (Basel). 2022;9(10):1445.
6. Al-Qahtani AS, Tulbah HI, BinHasan M, Abbasi MS, Ahmed N, Shabid S, et al. Surface properties of polymer resins fabricated with subtractive and additive manufacturing techniques. Polymers (Basel). 2021;13(23):4077.
7. de Paula Lopez V, Tardelli JDC, Botelho AL, Agnelli JAM, dos Reis AC. Mechanical performance of 3-dimensionally printed resins compared with conventional and milled resins for the manufacture of occlusal devices: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2023.
8. 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.
9. Van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater. 2012;28(1):3–12.
10. Oliveira JRS, Rodrigues L dos S, Finck NS. O fluxo de trabalho e a aplicação da impressão 3D na odontologia. REAS. 2023;23(5):12747.
11. Demathé A, Silva ARS, De Carli JP, Goiato MC, Miyahara GI. Odontologia baseada em evidências: otimizando a prática e a pesquisa. RFO UPF. 2012;17(1):96–100.
