Evaluation of the Milled and Three-Dimensional Digital Manufacturing, 10-Degree and 20-Degree Preparation Taper, Groove and Box Auxiliary Retentive Features, and Conventional and Resin-Based Provisional Cement Type on the Adhesive Failure Stress of 3 mm Short Provisional Crowns

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

This study evaluated the effects of milling (CADCAM), 3D printing, preparation taper angles (10-degree and 20-degree), auxiliary retentive features (groove and box), and provisional cement types (conventional and resin-based) on the adhesive failure stress of 3-mm short provisional crowns (PC). The research was motivated by the need to understand how digital dentistry technologies impact the retention and durability of provisional crowns.

Material/Methods

A total of 160 working models (3D-printed) and PCs [80 milled (CopraTemp)/80 printed (Asiga)] were fabricated from two 10- and 20-degree typodont master models and two 20-degree 3D-printed master models (groove and box), simulating a 3 mm high all-ceramic short PC. After provisional cementation with conventional (Kerr TempBond) and resin-based (ProviTemp) cements, 16 subgroups (n=10 each) underwent thermocycling (10 000 cycles; 5–55°C) and pull-off tests on a universal testing machine. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test.

Results

Conventional cement failed at lower stress for milled (47.68 to 73.54) and printed (48.40 to 77.91) as compared to resin cement for milled (104.2 to 137.27) and printed (184.85 to 328.84), respectively, with significant differences. Increased taper and groove decreased failure load except for the printed PC/resin cement combination. Use of proximal box preparation increased retention significantly. Except for 20-degree taper cemented with conventional cement, the differences in auxiliary retentive features for milled and printed provisional crowns were statistically significant at P≤0.05.

Conclusions

3D-printed PC, resin-based cement, 10-degree taper, and proximal box preparation were associated with higher retention than milled, conventional cements, 20-degree taper, and vertical groove.

Related collections

Most cited references 74

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

3D printing with polymers: Challenges among expanding options and opportunities.

Mike J Idacavage, Jeffrey W. Stansbury (2016)

Additive manufacturing, which is more colloquially referred to as 3D printing, is quickly approaching mainstream adoption as a highly flexible processing technique that can be applied to plastic, metal, ceramic, concrete and other building materials. However, taking advantage of the tremendous versatility associated with in situ photopolymerization as well as the ability to select from a variety of preformed processible polymers, 3D printing predominantly targets the production of polymeric parts and models. The goal of this review is to connect the various additive manufacturing techniques with the monomeric and polymeric materials they use while highlighting emerging material-based developments.