Marina Rodrigues Santi, Nadima Khodor, Michael Sekula, David Donatelli, Grace Mendonça De Souza
{"title":"Effect of cleaning solution on surface properties of 3D-printed denture materials.","authors":"Marina Rodrigues Santi, Nadima Khodor, Michael Sekula, David Donatelli, Grace Mendonça De Souza","doi":"10.1111/jopr.13936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the effect of cleaning solutions on surface properties of 3D-printed resins.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Seven different resin materials for denture base and teeth were used in the form of 280 half-disks. Samples were randomly assigned to two cleaning groups (FD, FreshDent; PO, Polydent), with daily 2- or 3-min immersion followed by water storage, repeated for 30 days. Samples were then cleaned in an ultrasonic bath with water and analyzed for surface roughness (Keyence, VHX-7000N) and hardness (Shimadzu, HMV-2 series). The pH of cleaning solutions was analyzed over 5-min and the surface morphology of specimens was analyzed via scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Statistical analysis used two-way ANOVA (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surface roughness of base materials was significantly affected (p < 0.001), whereas roughness of teeth materials was not. As for hardness, there was a significant interaction between materials and cleaning solution for both, base (p < 0.001) and teeth (p < 0.001). For teeth materials, PO significantly increased Denture's (Dentca) hardness and decreased that of Rodin's (Pac Dent), while PO significantly increased Rodin's Base (Pac Dent) hardness. The hardness of Flexcera Ultra (Envision Tec), Glidewell (Glidewell), Lucitone (Dentsply Sirona), and NextDent (NextDent) teeth and base materials were not affected by the cleaning solution. Overall, the pH of FD averaged 7.3 and PO averaged 6.6. All the SEM images indicated surface irregularities after immersion in either FD or PO.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>One-month of storage and cyclic cleaning of 3D- printed resins did not affect surface roughness but had a significant impact on hardness. The cleaning solutions' effect was not homogeneous among materials.</p>","PeriodicalId":49152,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13936","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the effect of cleaning solutions on surface properties of 3D-printed resins.
Materials and methods: Seven different resin materials for denture base and teeth were used in the form of 280 half-disks. Samples were randomly assigned to two cleaning groups (FD, FreshDent; PO, Polydent), with daily 2- or 3-min immersion followed by water storage, repeated for 30 days. Samples were then cleaned in an ultrasonic bath with water and analyzed for surface roughness (Keyence, VHX-7000N) and hardness (Shimadzu, HMV-2 series). The pH of cleaning solutions was analyzed over 5-min and the surface morphology of specimens was analyzed via scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Statistical analysis used two-way ANOVA (α = 0.05).
Results: Surface roughness of base materials was significantly affected (p < 0.001), whereas roughness of teeth materials was not. As for hardness, there was a significant interaction between materials and cleaning solution for both, base (p < 0.001) and teeth (p < 0.001). For teeth materials, PO significantly increased Denture's (Dentca) hardness and decreased that of Rodin's (Pac Dent), while PO significantly increased Rodin's Base (Pac Dent) hardness. The hardness of Flexcera Ultra (Envision Tec), Glidewell (Glidewell), Lucitone (Dentsply Sirona), and NextDent (NextDent) teeth and base materials were not affected by the cleaning solution. Overall, the pH of FD averaged 7.3 and PO averaged 6.6. All the SEM images indicated surface irregularities after immersion in either FD or PO.
Conclusions: One-month of storage and cyclic cleaning of 3D- printed resins did not affect surface roughness but had a significant impact on hardness. The cleaning solutions' effect was not homogeneous among materials.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Prosthodontics promotes the advanced study and practice of prosthodontics, implant, esthetic, and reconstructive dentistry. It is the official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, the American Dental Association-recognized voice of the Specialty of Prosthodontics. The journal publishes evidence-based original scientific articles presenting information that is relevant and useful to prosthodontists. Additionally, it publishes reports of innovative techniques, new instructional methodologies, and instructive clinical reports with an interdisciplinary flair. The journal is particularly focused on promoting the study and use of cutting-edge technology and positioning prosthodontists as the early-adopters of new technology in the dental community.