Comparative analysis of the physicochemical properties of 3D-Printed and conventional resins for temporary dental restorations
Objective. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the physical and mechanical properties of two resins used for provisional prostheses: a direct self-curing dimethacrylate resin and a 3D-printed resin, in order to assess their potential for different clinical applications. Methods. Flexural s...
| Autores: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) |
| Repositorio: | UPCommons. Portal del coneixement obert de la UPC |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:upcommons.upc.edu:2117/448786 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/2117/448786 https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/prosthesis7050129 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | 3D printing 3D resin Self-curing Provisionals Flexural strength Water absorption Wear resistance Scratch resistance Àrees temàtiques de la UPC::Enginyeria dels materials::Materials plàstics i polímers |
| Sumario: | Objective. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the physical and mechanical properties of two resins used for provisional prostheses: a direct self-curing dimethacrylate resin and a 3D-printed resin, in order to assess their potential for different clinical applications. Methods. Flexural strength, microhardness, wear resistance, and water absorption were evaluated in accordance with ISO 4049 and ISO 10477. Samples were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy, X-ray spectroscopy, and mechanical testing, including flexural, wear, and scratch assays. Results. The 3D-printed resin demonstrated superior flexural strength (128 ± 2 MPa vs. 127 ± 16 MPa), microhardness (19.45 HV vs. 8.10 HV, p < 0.05), and wear resistance (mean wear area: 0.030 mm2 vs. 0.047 mm2) compared to the self-curing dimethacrylate composite. However, it exhibited significantly higher water absorption (55.98 µg/mm3 vs. 15.0 µg/mm3), which may compromise its long-term durability in humid environments. Conclusions. Overall, the 3D-printed resin shows promising mechanical performance, but its high-water absorption remains a limitation for extended use. Further studies are required to evaluate its degradation and behavior under intraoral conditions. Clinical relevance. For the time being, self-curing resins remain the preferred choice for long-term provisional prostheses. |
|---|