增材制造与减材制造不同聚合物结构种植体支持即刻修复体的断裂强度比较。

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Elif Tuba Akçin, Mehmet Ali Kılıçarslan, Lale Karaağaçlıoğlu
{"title":"增材制造与减材制造不同聚合物结构种植体支持即刻修复体的断裂强度比较。","authors":"Elif Tuba Akçin, Mehmet Ali Kılıçarslan, Lale Karaağaçlıoğlu","doi":"10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.08.034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Statement of problem: </strong>Additive manufacturing is a rising trend in fabrication of polymeric restorations, but fracture strengths are uncertain especially for polyetheretherketone (PEEK) materials.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of the in vitro study was to compare the fracture strength of the 3-unit immediate restorations fabricated by subtractive and additive manufacturing.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Three-unit immediate prostheses, restoring the maxillary first and second premolar and first molar, were designed digitally. Eight groups were created according to the abutment, the material, and the manufacturing techniques. Titanium and PEEK abutment-supported 3-unit immediate restorations were fabricated by additive and subtractive manufacturing from polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and PEEK materials (n=12). After cementation, the specimens were subjected to dynamic loading (1.6 Hz, 50 N) with 60 000 thermal cycles (5 to 55 °C) in distilled water by using a dual-axis mastication simulator. After the dynamic loading, all specimens were statically loaded by using a universal testing machine and maximum values were recorded. All specimens were classified according to failure type. The normal distribution was checked with the Shapiro Wilk test, the variance homogeneity with the Levene test, and the sphericity assumption with the Mauchly W test. The 3-way ANOVA test was used to examine the difference between the independent groups that met the normality assumption with the interaction effect. Post hoc Bonferroni tests were used to reveal the group or groups that created the difference (α=.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For titanium-supported immediate restorations, specimens fabricated by the subtractive manufacturing showed higher failure load values compared to the additive manufacturing for both PMMA and PEEK material (P<.05). For PEEK-supported immediate restorations, the subtractive manufacturing showed higher values for PMMA materials but had lower values for PEEK material compared to the additive manufacturing (P<.05). Additionally, PEEK material had higher values compared to PMMA (P<.05). Titanium abutments showed higher failure load values compared to PEEK abutments (P<.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PEEK immediate restorations showed higher fracture strength values compared to PMMA immediate restorations. Subtractive manufacturing showed higher fracture strength values than additive manufacturing in all groups except PEEK immediate restorations supported by PEEK abutments. Fracture strengths of all specimens were within physiological occlusal forces and additive manufacturing is promising in the fabrication of implant-supported immediate restorations.</p>","PeriodicalId":16866,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of fracture strength of implant-supported immediate restorations with different polymeric structures fabricated by additive and subtractive manufacturing.\",\"authors\":\"Elif Tuba Akçin, Mehmet Ali Kılıçarslan, Lale Karaağaçlıoğlu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.08.034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Statement of problem: </strong>Additive manufacturing is a rising trend in fabrication of polymeric restorations, but fracture strengths are uncertain especially for polyetheretherketone (PEEK) materials.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of the in vitro study was to compare the fracture strength of the 3-unit immediate restorations fabricated by subtractive and additive manufacturing.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Three-unit immediate prostheses, restoring the maxillary first and second premolar and first molar, were designed digitally. Eight groups were created according to the abutment, the material, and the manufacturing techniques. Titanium and PEEK abutment-supported 3-unit immediate restorations were fabricated by additive and subtractive manufacturing from polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and PEEK materials (n=12). After cementation, the specimens were subjected to dynamic loading (1.6 Hz, 50 N) with 60 000 thermal cycles (5 to 55 °C) in distilled water by using a dual-axis mastication simulator. After the dynamic loading, all specimens were statically loaded by using a universal testing machine and maximum values were recorded. All specimens were classified according to failure type. The normal distribution was checked with the Shapiro Wilk test, the variance homogeneity with the Levene test, and the sphericity assumption with the Mauchly W test. The 3-way ANOVA test was used to examine the difference between the independent groups that met the normality assumption with the interaction effect. Post hoc Bonferroni tests were used to reveal the group or groups that created the difference (α=.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For titanium-supported immediate restorations, specimens fabricated by the subtractive manufacturing showed higher failure load values compared to the additive manufacturing for both PMMA and PEEK material (P<.05). For PEEK-supported immediate restorations, the subtractive manufacturing showed higher values for PMMA materials but had lower values for PEEK material compared to the additive manufacturing (P<.05). Additionally, PEEK material had higher values compared to PMMA (P<.05). Titanium abutments showed higher failure load values compared to PEEK abutments (P<.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PEEK immediate restorations showed higher fracture strength values compared to PMMA immediate restorations. Subtractive manufacturing showed higher fracture strength values than additive manufacturing in all groups except PEEK immediate restorations supported by PEEK abutments. Fracture strengths of all specimens were within physiological occlusal forces and additive manufacturing is promising in the fabrication of implant-supported immediate restorations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16866,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.08.034\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.08.034","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

摘要

问题说明:增材制造是聚合物修复体制造的一个上升趋势,但断裂强度是不确定的,特别是聚醚醚酮(PEEK)材料。目的:体外研究的目的是比较减法和增材制造的3单元直接修复体的断裂强度。材料与方法:采用数字化方法设计修复上颌第一、第二前磨牙和第一磨牙的三单元即刻修复体。根据基台、材料和制造技术,共创建了八组。以聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯(PMMA)和PEEK材料为原料,通过增材和减材制备钛和PEEK基台支撑的3单元直接修复体(n=12)。胶结后,利用双轴咀嚼模拟器在蒸馏水中进行动态加载(1.6 Hz, 50 N), 6万次热循环(5 ~ 55℃)。动加载后,采用万能试验机对所有试件进行静加载,并记录最大值。所有试件按失效类型进行分类。正态分布采用Shapiro Wilk检验,方差齐性采用Levene检验,球性假设采用Mauchly W检验。采用3-way方差分析检验符合正态性假设的独立组间的差异与相互作用效应。使用事后Bonferroni检验来揭示产生差异的组(α= 0.05)。结果:对于钛支撑的即刻修复体,与PMMA和PEEK材料的增材制造相比,采用减法制造的标本显示更高的失效载荷值(p结论:PEEK即刻修复体比PMMA即刻修复体显示更高的断裂强度值)。除由PEEK基台支持的PEEK即刻修复体外,减法制造的断裂强度值均高于增材制造。所有标本的断裂强度都在生理咬合力范围内,增材制造在种植体支持的即时修复中很有前途。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of fracture strength of implant-supported immediate restorations with different polymeric structures fabricated by additive and subtractive manufacturing.

Statement of problem: Additive manufacturing is a rising trend in fabrication of polymeric restorations, but fracture strengths are uncertain especially for polyetheretherketone (PEEK) materials.

Purpose: The purpose of the in vitro study was to compare the fracture strength of the 3-unit immediate restorations fabricated by subtractive and additive manufacturing.

Material and methods: Three-unit immediate prostheses, restoring the maxillary first and second premolar and first molar, were designed digitally. Eight groups were created according to the abutment, the material, and the manufacturing techniques. Titanium and PEEK abutment-supported 3-unit immediate restorations were fabricated by additive and subtractive manufacturing from polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and PEEK materials (n=12). After cementation, the specimens were subjected to dynamic loading (1.6 Hz, 50 N) with 60 000 thermal cycles (5 to 55 °C) in distilled water by using a dual-axis mastication simulator. After the dynamic loading, all specimens were statically loaded by using a universal testing machine and maximum values were recorded. All specimens were classified according to failure type. The normal distribution was checked with the Shapiro Wilk test, the variance homogeneity with the Levene test, and the sphericity assumption with the Mauchly W test. The 3-way ANOVA test was used to examine the difference between the independent groups that met the normality assumption with the interaction effect. Post hoc Bonferroni tests were used to reveal the group or groups that created the difference (α=.05).

Results: For titanium-supported immediate restorations, specimens fabricated by the subtractive manufacturing showed higher failure load values compared to the additive manufacturing for both PMMA and PEEK material (P<.05). For PEEK-supported immediate restorations, the subtractive manufacturing showed higher values for PMMA materials but had lower values for PEEK material compared to the additive manufacturing (P<.05). Additionally, PEEK material had higher values compared to PMMA (P<.05). Titanium abutments showed higher failure load values compared to PEEK abutments (P<.05).

Conclusions: PEEK immediate restorations showed higher fracture strength values compared to PMMA immediate restorations. Subtractive manufacturing showed higher fracture strength values than additive manufacturing in all groups except PEEK immediate restorations supported by PEEK abutments. Fracture strengths of all specimens were within physiological occlusal forces and additive manufacturing is promising in the fabrication of implant-supported immediate restorations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
13.00%
发文量
599
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is the leading professional journal devoted exclusively to prosthetic and restorative dentistry. The Journal is the official publication for 24 leading U.S. international prosthodontic organizations. The monthly publication features timely, original peer-reviewed articles on the newest techniques, dental materials, and research findings. The Journal serves prosthodontists and dentists in advanced practice, and features color photos that illustrate many step-by-step procedures. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is included in Index Medicus and CINAHL.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信