Biomechanical Behavior of a 3D-Printed Denture Base Material.

Viviane Cantelli, Vitor Trancoso Brito, Fabricio Mezzomo Collares, Alvaro Della Bona
{"title":"Biomechanical Behavior of a 3D-Printed Denture Base Material.","authors":"Viviane Cantelli, Vitor Trancoso Brito, Fabricio Mezzomo Collares, Alvaro Della Bona","doi":"10.11607/ijp.8295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate relevant material properties (flexural strength [σf], elastic modulus [E], water sorption [Wsp] and solubility [Wsl], and biocompatibility) of an additive manufacturing (AM) polymer vs a heat-curing acrylic resin (AR; control) for the manufacture of complete dentures, testing the hypothesis that fabrications from both materials would present acceptable material properties for clinical use.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The σf, E, Wsp, and Wsl were evaluated according to the ISO 20795-1:2013 standard, and the biocompatibility was evaluated using MTT and SRB assays. Disk-shaped specimens were fabricated and used for Wsp (n = 5), Wsl (n = 5), and biocompatibility (n = 3) testing. For assessment of σf and E, bar-shaped specimens (n = 30) were fabricated and stored in 37°C distilled water for 48 hours or 6 months before flexural testing in a universal testing machine with a constant displacement rate (5 ± 1 mm/minute). Data from σf, E, Wsp, Wsl, and biocompatibility tests were statistically analyzed using Student t test (α = .05). Weibull analysis was also used for σf and E data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant differences between the two materials were found for the evaluated material properties. Water storage for 6 months did not affect the flexural strength of the AM polymer, but this material showed inadequate σf and Wsl values.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite adequate biocompatibility and strength stability after 6 months of water storage, the AM polymer recommended for complete dentures needs further development to improve the material properties evaluated in this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.8295","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate relevant material properties (flexural strength [σf], elastic modulus [E], water sorption [Wsp] and solubility [Wsl], and biocompatibility) of an additive manufacturing (AM) polymer vs a heat-curing acrylic resin (AR; control) for the manufacture of complete dentures, testing the hypothesis that fabrications from both materials would present acceptable material properties for clinical use.

Materials and methods: The σf, E, Wsp, and Wsl were evaluated according to the ISO 20795-1:2013 standard, and the biocompatibility was evaluated using MTT and SRB assays. Disk-shaped specimens were fabricated and used for Wsp (n = 5), Wsl (n = 5), and biocompatibility (n = 3) testing. For assessment of σf and E, bar-shaped specimens (n = 30) were fabricated and stored in 37°C distilled water for 48 hours or 6 months before flexural testing in a universal testing machine with a constant displacement rate (5 ± 1 mm/minute). Data from σf, E, Wsp, Wsl, and biocompatibility tests were statistically analyzed using Student t test (α = .05). Weibull analysis was also used for σf and E data.

Results: Significant differences between the two materials were found for the evaluated material properties. Water storage for 6 months did not affect the flexural strength of the AM polymer, but this material showed inadequate σf and Wsl values.

Conclusions: Despite adequate biocompatibility and strength stability after 6 months of water storage, the AM polymer recommended for complete dentures needs further development to improve the material properties evaluated in this study.

三维打印义齿基托材料的生物力学行为。
目的:评估用于制造全口义齿的增材制造(AM)聚合物与热固化丙烯酸树脂(AR;对照组)的相关材料特性(抗弯强度[σf]、弹性模量[E]、吸水性[Wsp]和溶解性[Wsl]以及生物相容性),检验这两种材料制成的义齿是否具有临床使用的可接受材料特性:根据 ISO 20795-1:2013 标准评估σf、E、Wsp 和 Wsl,并使用 MTT 和 SRB 检测法评估生物相容性。制作了盘状试样,用于 Wsp(n = 5)、Wsl(n = 5)和生物相容性(n = 3)测试。为了评估σf和E,制作了条形试样(n = 30),并在37°C蒸馏水中储存48小时或6个月,然后在万能试验机中以恒定位移速率(5 ± 1 毫米/分钟)进行弯曲测试。σf、E、Wsp、Wsl 和生物相容性测试数据采用学生 t 检验(α = .05)进行统计分析。对 σf 和 E 数据也进行了 Weibull 分析:结果:在所评估的材料特性方面,两种材料之间存在显著差异。储水 6 个月不会影响 AM 聚合物的抗弯强度,但这种材料的 σf 和 Wsl 值不足:结论:尽管经过 6 个月的水储存后,AM 聚合物具有足够的生物相容性和强度稳定性,但建议用于全口义齿的 AM 聚合物仍需进一步开发,以改善本研究中评估的材料特性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信