3D printed, subtractive, and conventional acrylic resins: Evaluation of monotonic versus fatigue behavior and surface characteristics
Luiza Freitas Brum Souza,Telma Souza Pires,Priscila Pauli Kist,Luiz Felipe Valandro,Rafael R. de Moraes,Mutlu Özcan,Gabriel Kalil Rocha Pereira
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2024.106556
IF: 4.042
2024-04-20
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
Abstract:This study assessed the mechanical properties and surface characteristics of dental prosthetic acrylic resin fabricated by 3D printing, comparing it with subtractive, pressing, and molding techniques. Bar-shaped specimens (N= 90; 65 × 10 × 3.3 mm; ISO:207951) were prepared and assigned into six groups: PRINT (3D printing vis stereolithography with PriZma 3D Bio Denture, Makertech Labs); SUB (subtractive manufacturing with Vipiblock Trilux, Vipi); PRESS Base (pressing using muffle with Thermo Vipi Wave, Vipi for base); PRESS Tooth (pressing with Onda-cryl, Clássico for tooth); MOLD Base (molding using addition silicone with Vipi Flash, Vipi for base); and MOLD Tooth (molding with Dencor, Clássico for tooth). Monotonic flexural strength ( FS ) and elastic modulus ( E ) were measured using a three-point bending approach (n= 5) on a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/min. Fatigue testing (n= 10) followed similar geometry and settings, with a frequency of 2 Hz, initial stress level at 20 MPa, and stress increments of 5 MPa every 2,500 cycles. Surface roughness (n= 10) was assessed through profilometry, and fractographic and topographic analyses were conducted. Statistical analyses included One-Way ANOVA for monotonic FS , roughness, and E , along with Kaplan-Meier with Mantel-Cox post-hoc and Weibull analysis for fatigue strength. PRINT showed lower monotonic FS than the SUB and PRESS Tooth but comparable fatigue strength to these groups and superior to PRESS Base and MOLD (Base and Tooth) groups. All groups had similar Weibull moduli. Surface roughness of the PRINT group was comparable to most techniques but higher than the PRESS Tooth group. Fractographic analysis revealed fractures originating from surface defects under tensile stress, with SEM showing scratch patterns in all groups except PRINT, which had a more uniform surface. Despite its lower monotonic strength, 3D printed resin demonstrated comparable fatigue strength to subtractive and pressing methods and similar surface roughness to most methods, indicating its potential as a viable option for dental prosthesis.
engineering, biomedical,materials science, biomaterials