Open Access, Peer-reviewed, Quarterly
pISSN 0301-2875
eISSN 2005-3789
    J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 2019 Apr;57(2):110-117. Korean.
    Published online Apr 25, 2019.
    https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2019.57.2.110
    © 2019 The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
    Original Article

    In vitro evaluation of the wear resistance of provisional resin materials fabricated by different methods

    Jong-Ju Ahn,1 Jung-Bo Huh,1 and Jae-Won Choi1,2
      • 1Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Republic of Korea.
      • 2Institute of Translational Dental Sciences, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Republic of Korea.
    • Corresponding Author: Jae-Won Choi. Department of Prosthodontics, Institute of Translational Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University, 20, Geumo-ro, Mulgeum-eup, Yangsan 50612, Republic of Korea. +82 (0)55 360 5133: Email: won9180@hanmail.net
    Received January 21, 2019; Revised February 11, 2019; Accepted February 14, 2019.

    This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

    Abstract

    Purpose

    This study was to evaluate the wear resistance of 3D printed, milled, and conventionally cured provisional resin materials.

    Materials and methods

    Four types of resin materials made with different methods were examined: Stereolithography apparatus (SLA) 3D printed resin (S3P), digital light processing (DLP) 3D printed resin (D3P), milled resin (MIL), conventionally self-cured resin (CON). In the 3D printed resin specimens, the build orientation and layer thickness were set to 0° and 100 µm, respectively. The specimens were tested in a 2-axis chewing simulator with the steatite as the antagonist under thermocycling condition (5 kg, 30,000 cycles, 0.8 Hz, 5℃/55℃). Wear losses of the specimens were calculated using CAD software and scanning electron microscope (SEM) was used to investigate wear surface of the specimens. Statistical significance was determined using One-way ANOVA and Dunnett T3 analysis (α = .05).

    Results

    Wear losses of the S3P, D3P, and MIL groups significantly smaller than those of the CON group (P < .05). There was no significant difference among S3P, D3P, and MIL group (P > .05). In the SEM observations, in the S3P and D3P groups, vertical cracks were observed in the sliding direction of the antagonist. In the MIL group, there was an overall uniform wear surface, whereas in the CON group, a distinct wear track and numerous bubbles were observed.

    Conclusion

    Within the limits of this study, provisional resin materials made with 3D printing show adequate wear resistance for applications in dentistry.

    Keywords
    3D printing; Additive manufacturing; Subtractive manufacturing; Resin; Wear

    Figures

    Fig. 1
    Preparation of the steatite specimens.

    Fig. 2
    Preparation of the resin specimens. (A) S3P, (B) D3P, (C) MIL, (D) CON (S3P: SLA 3D printed resin; D3P: DLP 3D printed resin; MIL: milled resin; CON: conventionally self-cured resin).

    Fig. 3
    Measurement protocol of wear losses. (A) Solid file of specimen before the wear test, (B) Solid file of specimen after the wear test, (C) Sectioning the worn region in the overlapping file before (A) and after (B) test, (D) Measurement of wear losses of worn region.

    Fig. 4
    The mean value (mm3) and standard deviation of wear losses of the resin materials after wear test. The columns connected by bars were significantly different (S3P: SLA 3D printed resin; D3P: DLP 3D printed resin; MIL: milled resin; CON: conventionally self-cured resin).

    Fig. 5
    SEM image of the worn surfaces of the resin materials after wear test (S3P: SLA 3D printed resin; D3P: DLP 3D printed resin; MIL: milled resin; CON: conventionally self-cured resin).

    Tables

    Table 1
    Materials tested in this study

    Table 2
    Mean values and SDs of wear losses in each group (unit: mm3)

    Notes

    This work was supported by a 2-year Research Grant of Pusan National University.

    References

      1. Takamizawa T, Barkmeier WW, Tsujimoto A, Scheidel D, Erickson RL, Latta MA, Miyazaki M. Mechanical properties and simulated wear of provisional resin materials. Oper Dent 2015;40:603–613.
      1. Gough M. A review of temporary crowns and bridges. Dent Update 1994;21:203–207.
      1. Fisher DW, Shillingburg HT Jr, Dewhirst RB. Indirect temporary restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1971;82:160–163.
      1. Melton D, Cobb S, Krell KV. A comparison of two temporary restorations: light-cured resin versus a self-polymerizing temporary restoration. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1990;70:221–225.
      1. Shillingburg HT, Sather DA, Wilson EL, Cain JR, Mitchell DL, Blanco LJ, Kessler JC. In: Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. 4th ed. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing; 2012. pp. 149-163.
      1. Nigel Tom T, Uthappa MA, Sunny K, Begum F, Nautiyal M, Tamore S. Provisional restorations: An overview of materials used. J Adv Clin Res Insights 2016;3:212–214.
      1. van Dijken JW. Direct resin composite inlays/onlays: an 11 year follow-up. J Dent 2000;28:299–306.
      1. Seo HS, Park JW, Hong SM, Lee SR. Comparative analysis of immediate functional loading and conventional loading about implant survival rate in the completely edentulous: Retrospective study. J Korean Dent Assoc 2014;52:771–782.
      1. Bennani V. Fabrication of an indirect-direct provisional fixed partial denture. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:364–365.
      1. Song KY, Sorensen JA. Marginal adaptation of new provisional materials for fixed prosthodontics. J Korean Acad Stomatognathic Funct Occlusion 1997;13:247–255.
      1. Lee S. Prospect for 3D printing technology in medical, dental, and pediatric dental field. J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent 2016;43:93–108.
      1. Strub JR, Rekow ED, Witkowski S. Computer-aided design and fabrication of dental restorations: current systems and future possibilities. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137:1289–1296.
      1. Kim SJ, Jo KH, Lee KB. A comparison of the fidelity of various zirconia-based all-ceramic crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM systems. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2009;47:148–155.
      1. van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater 2012;28:3–12.
      1. Landers R, Pfister A, Hübner U, John H, Schmelzeisen R, Mülhaupt R. Fabrication of soft tissue engineering scaffolds by means of rapid prototyping techniques. J Mater Sci 2002;37:3107.
      1. Barry B. 3-D printing: The new industrial revolution. Business Horizons 2012;55:155–162.
      1. Santosa RE. Provisional restoration options in implant dentistry. Aust Dent J 2007;52:234–242.
      1. Givens EJ Jr, Neiva G, Yaman P, Dennison JB. Marginal adaptation and color stability of four provisional materials. J Prosthodont 2008;17:97–101.
      1. Fox CW, Abrams BL, Doukoudakis A. Provisional restorations for altered occlusions. J Prosthet Dent 1984;52:567–572.
      1. Asefi S, Eskandarion S, Hamidiaval S. Fissure sealant materials: Wear resistance of flowable composite resins. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2016;10:194–199.
      1. Suwannaroop P, Chaijareenont P, Koottathape N, Takahashi H, Arksornnukit M. In vitro wear resistance, hardness and elastic modulus of artificial denture teeth. Dent Mater J 2011;30:461–468.
      1. Park JM, Ahn JS, Cha HS, Lee JH. Wear resistance of 3D printing resin material opposing zirconia and metal antagonists. Materials (Basel) 2018;11:1043
      1. Astudillo Rubio D, Delgado Gaete A, Bellot-Arcís C, Montiel-Company JM, Pascual-Moscardó A, Almerich-Silla JM. Mechanical properties of provisional dental materials: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2018;13:e0193162
      1. Tahayeri A, Morgan M, Fugolin AP, Bompolaki D, Athirasala A, Pfeifer CS, Ferracane JL, Bertassoni LE. 3D printed versus conventionally cured provisional crown and bridge dental materials. Dent Mater 2018;34:192–200.
      1. Alharbi N, Osman R, Wismeijer D. Effects of build direction on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed complete coverage interim dental restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:760–767.
      1. Digholkar S, Madhav VN, Palaskar J. Evaluation of the flexural strength and microhardness of provisional crown and bridge materials fabricated by different methods. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2016;16:328–334.
      1. Alharbi N, Osman RB, Wismeijer D. Factors influencing the dimensional accuracy of 3D-printed full-coverage dental restorations using stereolithography technology. Int J Prosthodont 2016;29:503–510.
      1. Lambrechts P, Braem M, Vuylsteke-Wauters M, Vanherle G. Quantitative in vivo wear of human enamel. J Dent Res 1989;68:1752–1754.
      1. Yi HJ, Jeon YC, Jeong CM, Jeong HC. An in-vitro wear study of indirect composite resins against human enamel. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2007;45:611–620.
      1. Kern M, Strub JR, Lü XY. Wear of composite resin veneering materials in a dual-axis chewing simulator. J Oral Rehabil 1999;26:372–378.
      1. Heintze SD, Zappini G, Rousson V. Wear of ten dental restorative materials in five wear simulators--results of a round robin test. Dent Mater 2005;21:304–317.
      1. DeLong R, Sakaguchi RL, Douglas WH, Pintado MR. The wear of dental amalgam in an artificial mouth: a clinical correlation. Dent Mater 1985;1:238–242.
      1. Alt V, Hannig M, Wöstmann B, Balkenhol M. Fracture strength of temporary fixed partial dentures: CAD/CAM versus directly fabricated restorations. Dent Mater 2011;27:339–347.
      1. Albashaireh ZS, Ghazal M, Kern M. Two-body wear of different ceramic materials opposed to zirconia ceramic. J Prosthet Dent 2010;104:105–113.
      1. Chadwick RG. Thermocycling-the effects upon the compressive strength and abrasion resistance of three composite resins. J Oral Rehabil 1994;21:533–543.
      1. Mair LH, Stolarski TA, Vowles RW, Lloyd CH. Wear: mechanisms, manifestations and measurement. Report of a workshop. J Dent 1996;24:141–148.
      1. Bae EJ, Jeong ID, Kim WC, Kim JH. A comparative study of additive and subtractive manufacturing for dental restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2017;118:187–193.
      1. Park C, Kim MH, Go JS, Hong SM, Shin BS. A study on the comparison mechanical properties of 3D printing prototypes with laminating direction. J Manuf Eng Technol 2015;24:334–341.
    MeSH Terms
    Clothing
    Dentistry
    In Vitro Techniques*
    Mastication
    Methods*
    Printing, Three-Dimensional
    Metrics
    Share
    Figures
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide

    1 / 5

    Tables
    slide
    slide

    1 / 2

    PERMALINK