Effect of build orientation in gloss, roughness and color of 3D-printed resins for provisional indirect restorations.
| Autor: | de Castro EF; Department of Restorative Dentistry, Piracicaba Dental School, State University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil. Electronic address: eduardofdecastro@hotmail.com., Nima G; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Ethics, Research and Education, School of Dentistry, Universidad de Los Andes, Santiago, Chile., Rueggeberg FA; Department of Restorative Sciences, Dental College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA., Araújo-Neto VG; Department of Restorative Dentistry, Piracicaba Dental School, State University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil., Faraoni JJ; Department of Restorative Dentistry, Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil., Palma-Dibb RG; Department of Restorative Dentistry, Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil., Giannini M; Department of Restorative Dentistry, Piracicaba Dental School, State University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil. |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Zdroj: | Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials [Dent Mater] 2023 Jul; Vol. 39 (7), pp. e1-e11. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 May 27. |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.dental.2023.05.002 |
| Abstrakt: | Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of build orientation of 3D-printed provisional resins (3DRs) on gloss (Gs), surface roughness (Sa), maximum profile valley depth (Rv), and color difference (∆E Methods: PMMA CAD/CAM blocks (Vita Temp/Vita) were sectioned and served as a Control. Four 3DRs (Cosmos-SLA/Yller, Cosmos-DLP/Yller, PriZma-Bioprov/Makertech, Nanolab/Wilcos) were obtained as discs (15-mm diameter, 2.5-mm thickness) in three orientations (0°, 45°, and 90°) using different 3D printers (Form 2/Formlabs, P30/Straumann, Hunter/Flashforge, W3D/Wilcos, respectively). Samples were then cleaned with isopropyl alcohol prior to post-curing in specific post-curing units. Half of the samples' surface was covered with an adhesive tape and submitted to 10,000 toothbrushing (TB) cycles. The Gs and Sa at the brushed and not brushed surfaces were evaluated with a glossmeter (Novo-curve) and a laser confocal microscope (OLS5000) (n = 10), which also obtained the Rv and 3D representative images of the interface between not brushed and brushed surfaces. Electron microscopy images of the surface of some samples was also performed (n = 3). On another set of samples (n = 5), the coordinates of luminosity and color were obtained with a spectrophotometer (Easyshade V) at baseline and after 16.7 h and 200 h of UVB aging, to calculate the ∆E Results: Build orientation of 3DRs did not influence any of the variables studied. The 10,000 TB cycles resulted in a decrease in Gs and increase in Sa for all resins tested. The control showed higher Gs after 10,000 TB cycles than Cosmos-SLA and Nanolab resins. Compared to all 3DRs, Control presented lower ∆E Significance: Alterations in build orientation are very useful and frequently performed in the day-today of 3D-printing, thus its effect in the optical properties and in the topography of 3D-printed restorations is very relevant. For the evaluated 3D-printed provisional resins, build orientation did not influence any of the variables studied (Gs, Sa, Rv, and ∆E Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no financial interest in the companies whose materials are included in this article. No conflict of interest to declare. (Copyright © 2023 The Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.) |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect