Additive manufacturing trueness and internal fit of crowns in resin modified with a commercially available ceramic composite concentrate.

Abstract

Statement of problem: Inorganic fillers can be incorporated into additively manufactured (AM) resins to improve their properties, and a ceramic composite concentrate has been recently marketed for this purpose. However, knowledge on the printability of AM resins modified with this concentrate is lacking.

Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the manufacturing trueness and internal fit of AM crowns in a dental resin modified with a commercially available ceramic composite concentrate.

Material and methods: A maxillary right first molar typodont tooth was prepared and digitized to design a crown in standard tessellation language (STL) format. This STL file was used to fabricate a total of 30 AM crowns, 10 with a resin with no fillers for interim restorations (AM-I), 10 AM-I resin incorporated with ceramic composite concentrate (AM-IR), and 10 with a ceramic-filled resin intended for definitive restorations (AM-D). The modification of the AM-IR resin was performed by mechanically mixing 30 wt% of a commercially available ceramic composite concentrate into AM-I. An intraoral scanner was used to digitize all crowns, which were then seated on the prepared typodont abutment and rescanned. The manufacturing trueness of each crown was measured in 4 regions (overall, external, intaglio, and marginal) and reported with root mean square (RMS) estimates. The internal gaps were calculated by using a triple scan protocol. The intaglio surface deviations were assessed with the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests, while the remaining data were analyzed with the 1-way analysis of variance and Tukey honestly significant difference tests (α=.05).

Results: AM-IR had the highest overall and external RMS and had higher intaglio RMS than AM-D (P≤.001). AM-I had the lowest marginal RMS (P≤.002). AM-IR had the highest average gap values (P≤.027).

Conclusions: AM-IR crowns mostly had lower trueness and high internal gaps. However, the differences among the tested materials in fabrication trueness and average gap values were small, and internal gaps were within the previously reported thresholds.