A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare 3D Printed Versus Conventionally Fabricated Complete Dentures.

IF 1.2 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry Pub Date : 2025-08-14 DOI:10.1922/EJPRD_2835Keeling09

A Keeling, C Osnes, K Davda, S Khalid, G Dukanovic, C Porter, D Attrill, H Devlin, N Archer, F Shuweihdi, T P Hyde

{"title":"A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare 3D Printed Versus Conventionally Fabricated Complete Dentures.","authors":"A Keeling, C Osnes, K Davda, S Khalid, G Dukanovic, C Porter, D Attrill, H Devlin, N Archer, F Shuweihdi, T P Hyde","doi":"10.1922/EJPRD_2835Keeling09","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: This pilot randomised controlled trial assessed the acceptability of 3D printed complete dentures versus conventionally manufactured dentures. It aimed to identify the sample size needed for a full-scale trial and refine digital fabrication and trial protocols.Methods: A multi-centre, double-blinded, cross-over design was used with 17 participants (14 completed), all aged 60+ and complete denture wearers. Each participant received 3D printed and conventional dentures, worn for eight weeks each. Tooth positioning and denture shape were standardised. The OHIP-EDENT questionnaire measured comfort, retention, stability, and chewing efficiency.Results: A sample size of 35 is recommended for a definitive trial. Participants preferred conventional dentures. Issues with 3D printed dentures included unreliable tooth placement and structural failures. Seven breakages (one denture broke four times) and six tooth debondings occured in the 3D printed group.Conclusions: A sample size of 35 participants is recommended for a definitive trial, post adjustment. 3D printing offers potential benefits, but this study found lower patient satisfaction and material challenges in the 3D printed dentures. Technical and protocol refinements are needed before 3D printed dentures can be recommended for routine use.Clinical relevance: Until fabrication issues are resolved, conventional dentures remain the more reliable option in prosthodontic care.","PeriodicalId":45686,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_2835Keeling09","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This pilot randomised controlled trial assessed the acceptability of 3D printed complete dentures versus conventionally manufactured dentures. It aimed to identify the sample size needed for a full-scale trial and refine digital fabrication and trial protocols.

Methods: A multi-centre, double-blinded, cross-over design was used with 17 participants (14 completed), all aged 60+ and complete denture wearers. Each participant received 3D printed and conventional dentures, worn for eight weeks each. Tooth positioning and denture shape were standardised. The OHIP-EDENT questionnaire measured comfort, retention, stability, and chewing efficiency.

Results: A sample size of 35 is recommended for a definitive trial. Participants preferred conventional dentures. Issues with 3D printed dentures included unreliable tooth placement and structural failures. Seven breakages (one denture broke four times) and six tooth debondings occured in the 3D printed group.

Conclusions: A sample size of 35 participants is recommended for a definitive trial, post adjustment. 3D printing offers potential benefits, but this study found lower patient satisfaction and material challenges in the 3D printed dentures. Technical and protocol refinements are needed before 3D printed dentures can be recommended for routine use.

Clinical relevance: Until fabrication issues are resolved, conventional dentures remain the more reliable option in prosthodontic care.

查看原文本刊更多论文

一项比较3D打印与传统制作全口义齿的试点随机对照试验。

目的：本试点随机对照试验评估3D打印全口义齿与传统制造全口义齿的可接受性。它旨在确定全面试验所需的样本量，并完善数字制造和试验方案。方法：采用多中心、双盲、交叉设计，纳入17例（已完成14例），年龄均在60岁以上，均为全口义齿佩戴者。每个参与者都佩戴3D打印假牙和传统假牙，每个假牙佩戴8周。规范牙位和义齿形状。OHIP-EDENT问卷测量了舒适性、固位性、稳定性和咀嚼效率。结果：一个明确的试验建议样本量为35。参与者更喜欢传统的假牙。3D打印假牙的问题包括不可靠的牙齿放置和结构故障。3D打印组出现7例牙齿断裂（1例假牙断裂4次）和6例牙齿脱粘。结论：建议35名参与者的样本量进行最终试验，工作地点差价调整数。3D打印提供了潜在的好处，但这项研究发现，3D打印假牙的患者满意度较低，材料也存在挑战。在推荐常规使用3D打印假牙之前，需要对技术和方案进行改进。临床意义：在制造问题得到解决之前，传统义齿仍然是修复护理中更可靠的选择。

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

European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-

CiteScore

2.30

自引率

7.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： The European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry is published quarterly and includes clinical and research articles in subjects such as prosthodontics, operative dentistry, implantology, endodontics, periodontics and dental materials.