Comparison of the Physical and Mechanical Properties of Additively Manufactured Thermoplastics, 3D-Printed Resin, and Conventional Provisional Restorative Materials
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15517/kfjmxd89Keywords:
Dental materials; Printing; Three-dimensional; Polymethyl methacrylate; Flexural strength; Hardness tests.Abstract
To compare the physical and mechanical properties of a DLP-fabricated 3D-printed provisional resin and FDM-fabricated thermoplastic materials with those of conventional provisional restorative materials. In the additive manufacturing groups, a 3D-printed provisional resin, FDM-fabricated polylactic acid (PLA) and polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG) were evaluated. The conventional materials consisted of a bis-acryl provisional composite resin and a polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) resin. All specimens (n=10 per group) were prepared in accordance with the relevant manufacturers’ instructions. Microhardness, water sorption, flexural strength, and elastic modulus were measured at baseline and after 14 days of storage in artificial saliva. Data were analyzed using parametric statistical methods (p<0.05). The bis-acryl provisional composite resin showed the highest Vickers microhardness and elastic modulus values, the lowest water sorption, and flexural strength comparable to the 3D-printed provisional resin but significantly higher than PMMA. The 3D-printed provisional resin performed similarly to bis-acryl and PMMA for microhardness and flexural behavior but exhibited higher water sorption. FDM-fabricated PLA and PETG showed lower performance across the evaluated properties (p<0.05). The bis-acryl provisional composite resin demonstrated the highest mechanical performance among the tested materials. The three-dimensional printed provisional resin showed properties comparable with polymethyl methacrylate, whereas the fused deposition modeling fabricated polylactic acid and polyethylene terephthalate glycol materials exhibited inferior physical and mechanical properties.
Downloads
References
Mizrahi B. Temporary restorations: the key to success. Br Dent J. 2019; 226 (10): 761-768. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-019-0360-1
Mai H.N., Lee K.B., Lee D.H. Fit of interim crowns fabricated using photopolymer-jetting 3D printing. J Prosthet Dent. 2017; 118 (2): 208-215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.10.030
Regish K.M., Sharma D., Prithviraj D.R. Techniques of fabrication of provisional restoration: an overview. Int J Dent. 2011; 2011: 134659. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/134659
Syed M., Chopra R., Sachdev V. Allergic reactions to dental materials-a systematic review. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015; 9 (10): ZE04-ZE9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2015/15640.6589
Raszewski Z., Nowakowska-Toporowska A., Nowakowska D., Więckiewicz W. Update on acrylic resins used in dentistry. Mini Rev Med Chem. 2021; 21 (15): 2130-2137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2174/1389557521666210226151214
Abduo J., Lyons K., Bennamoun M. Trends in computer-aided manufacturing in prosthodontics: a review of the available streams. Int J Dent. 2014; 2014: 783948. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/783948
van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater. 2012; 28 (1): 3-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.10.014
Lee B.I., You S.G., You S.M., Kang S.Y., Kim J.H. Effect of rinsing time on the accuracy of interim crowns fabricated by digital light processing: an in vitro study. J Adv Prosthodont. 2021; 13 (1): 24-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2021.13.1.24
Yu B.Y., Son K., Lee K.B. Evaluation of intaglio surface trueness and margin quality of interim crowns in accordance with the build angle of stereolithography apparatus 3-dimensional printing. J Prosthet Dent. 2021; 126 (2): 231-237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.04.028
Park J.M., Jeon J., Koak J.Y., Kim S.K., Heo S.J. Dimensional accuracy and surface characteristics of 3D-printed dental casts. J Prosthet Dent. 2021; 126 (3): 427-437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.07.008
Lee K.Y., Cho J.W., Chang N.Y., Chae J.M., Kang K.H., Kim S.C., Cho J.H. Accuracy of three-dimensional printing for manufacturing replica teeth. Korean J Orthod. 2015; 45 (5): 217-225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2015.45.5.217
Caussin E., Moussally C., Le Goff S., Fasham T., Troizier-Cheyne M., Tapie L. et al. Vat photopolymerization 3D printing in dentistry: a comprehensive review of actual popular technologies Materials (Basel). 2024; 17 (4): 950. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17040950
Nowacki B., Kowol P., Kozioł M., Olesik P., Wieczorek J., Wacławiak K. Effect of post-process curing and washing time on mechanical properties of mSLA printouts. Materials (Basel). 2021; 14 (17): 4856. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14174856
Hsueh M.H., Lai C.J., Wang S.H., Zeng Y.S., Hsieh C.H., Pan C.Y. et al. Effect of printing parameters on the thermal and mechanical properties of 3D-printed PLA and PETG, using fused deposition modeling. Polymers (Basel). 2021; 13 (11): 1758. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13111758
Ranakoti L., Gangil B., Bhandari P., Singh T., Sharma S., Singh J. et al. Promising role of polylactic acid as an ingenious biomaterial in scaffolds, drug delivery, tissue engineering, and medical implants: research developments, and prospective applications. Molecules. 2023; 28 (2): 485. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28020485
Haik A.A., Yassir Y.A. Efficiency of polyethylene terephthalate glycol thermoplastic material to functional and expansion forces in orthodontic applications: an experimental study. ScientificWorldJournal. 2025; 2025: 7232779. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/tswj/7232779
Paradowska-Stolarz A.M., Wieckiewicz M., Mikulewicz M., Malysa A., Dus-Ilnicka I., Seweryn P. et al. Comparison of the tensile modulus of three 3D-printable materials used in dentistry. Dent Med Probl. 2023; 60 (3): 505-511. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17219/dmp/166070
Paradowska-Stolarz A., Wieckiewicz M., Kozakiewicz M., Jurczyszyn K. Mechanical properties, fractal dimension, and texture analysis of selected 3D-printed resins used in dentistry that underwent the compression test. Polymers (Basel). 2023; 15 (7): 1772. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15071772
Doh R.M., Choi W.I., Kim S.Y., Jung B.Y. Mechanical properties of a polylactic 3D-printed interim crown after thermocycling. PLoS One. 2025; 20 (1): e0318217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318217
Crenn M.J., Rohman G., Fromentin O., Benoit A. Polylactic acid as a biocompatible polymer for three-dimensional printing of interim prosthesis: mechanical characterization. Dent Mater J. 2022; 41 (1): 110-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2021-151
Aneksomboonpol P., Klaisiri A., Katheng A., Limchaikul K., Intajak P., Kittikundecha N. et al. Comparative analysis of fluorescent characteristics of different provisional restorative materials for improved dental esthetics. Polymers (Basel). 2024; 16 (22): 3184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16223184
Song S.Y., Shin Y.H., Lee J.Y., Shin S.W. Color stability of provisional restorative materials with different fabrication methods. J Adv Prosthodont. 2020; 12 (5): 259-264. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2020.12.5.259
Porojan L., Vasiliu R., Bejan F.R., Gherban M., Uțu D., Matichescu A. Tribological performance of CAM-processed interim dental restoration materials: effects of 3D printing, milling, and post-processing on wear and surface topography. J Funct Biomater. 2026; 17 (3): 136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb17030136
Leung V.W., Darvell B.W. Artificial salivas for in vitro studies of dental materials. J Dent. 1997; 25 (6): 475-484. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(96)00068-1
Mortier E., Gerdolle D., Dahoun A., Panighi MM. Influence of initial water content on the subsequent water sorption and solubility behavior in restorative polymers. Am J Dent. 2005; 18 (3): 177-181.
Jain S, Sayed ME, Shetty M, Alqahtani SM, Al Wadei MHD, Gupta SG et al. Physical and mechanical properties of 3D-printed provisional crowns and fixed dental prosthesis resins compared to CAD/CAM milled and conventional provisional resins: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Polymers (Basel). 2022; 14 (13): 2691. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14132691
Altarazi A., Haider J., Alhotan A., Alqahtani S.M., Al Wadei M.H.D., Gupta S.G., et al. Assessing the physical and mechanical properties of 3D printed acrylic material for denture base application. Dent Mater. 2022; 38 (12): 1841-1854. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2022.09.006
Huettig F., Kustermann A., Kuscu E., Geis-Gerstorfer J., Spintzyk S. Polishability and wear resistance of splint material for oral appliances produced with conventional, subtractive, and additive manufacturing. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2017; 75: 175-179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.07.019
Tahayeri A, Morgan M, Fugolin AP, Bompolaki D, Athirasala A, Pfeifer CS et al. 3D printed versus conventionally cured provisional crown and bridge dental materials. Dent Mater. 2018; 34 (2): 192-200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2017.10.003
Park J.M., Ahn J.S., Cha H.S., Lee J.H. Wear resistance of 3D printing resin material opposing zirconia and metal antagonists. Materials (Basel). 2018; 11 (6): 1043. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11061043
Reeponmaha T, Angwaravong O, Angwarawong T. Comparison of fracture strength after thermo-mechanical aging between provisional crowns made with CAD/CAM and conventional method. J Adv Prosthodont. 2020; 12 (4): 218-224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2020.12.4.218
Deb S. Polymers in dentistry. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 1998; 212 (6): 453-464. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1243/0954411981534213
Hassan M, Asghar M, Din SU, Zafar MS. Thermoset polymethacrylate-based materials for dental applications. In: Grumezescu V., Grumezescu A.M., editors. Materials for Biomedical Engineering: Thermoset and Thermoplastic Polymers. 1st ed. Elsevier; 2019:273-308. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816874-5.00008-6
Naseri M., Ahangari Z., Shahbazi Moghadam M., Mohammadian M. Coronal sealing ability of three temporary filling materials. Iran Endod J. 2012; 7 (1): 20-24.
Alzahrani SJ, Hajjaj MS, Azhari AA, Ahmed WM, Yeslam HE, Carvalho RM. Mechanical properties of three-dimensional printed provisional resin materials for crown and fixed dental prosthesis: a systematic review. Bioengineering (Basel). 2023; 10 (6): 663. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10060663
Chen H, Cheng DH, Huang SC, Lin YM. Comparison of flexural properties and cytotoxicity of interim materials printed from mono-LCD and DLP 3D printers. J Prosthet Dent. 2021; 126(5):703-708. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.09.003
Molinero-Mourelle P., Canals S., Gómez-Polo M., Solá-Ruiz M.F., Del Río Highsmith J., Viñuela A.C. Polylactic acid as a material for three-dimensional printing of provisional restorations. Int J Prosthodont. 2018; 31 (4): 349-350. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.5709
de Freitas B.N., Mendonça L.M., Cruvinel P.B., de Lacerda T.J., Leite F.G.J., Oliveira-Santos C. et al. Comparison of intraoral scanning and CBCT to generate digital and 3D-printed casts by fused deposition modeling and digital light processing. J Dent. 2023; 128:104387. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104387
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Engin Saçu, Mehmet Can Ararat, Safa Tuncer, Mustafa Demirci, Neslihan Tekçe.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
ODOVTOS - Int. J. Dent. Sc. endorses CC BY-NC-SA
This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. If you remix, adapt, or build upon the material, you must license the modified material under identical terms. CC BY-NC-SA includes the following elements:
BY: credit must be given to the creator.
NC: Only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted.
SA: Adaptations must be shared under the same terms.
