Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Ibb University, Ibb, Yemen.
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Taibah University, Medina, Saudi Arabia.
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2024 Aug;36(8):1153-1170. doi: 10.1111/jerd.13228. Epub 2024 Mar 29.
To assess the feasibility of producing 3D-printed intracoronal restorations, thin and ultrathin veneers, and to compare their mechanical behavior, accuracy, biological, and stain susceptibility to the currently applied milled restorations.
The databases were comprehensively searched for relevant records up to January 2024 without language restrictions. All studies that assessed 3D-printed partial coverage restorations including inlays, onlays, laminate, and occlusal veneers were retrieved.
The web search yielded a total of 1142 records, with 8 additional records added from websites at a later stage. Only 17 records were ultimately included in the review. The included records compared 3D-printed; alumina-based- and zirconia ceramics, lithium disilicate ceramics, polymer infiltrated ceramics, polyetheretherketone (PEEK), resin composites, and acrylic resins to their CNC milled analogs. The pooled data indicated that it is possible to produce ultrathin restorations with a thickness of less than 0.2 mm. 3D-printed laminate veneers and intracoronal restorations exhibited superior trueness, as well as better marginal and internal fit compared to milled restorations (p < 0.05). However, it should be noted that the choice of materials and preparation design may influence these outcomes. In terms of cost, the initial investment and production expenses associated with 3D printing were significantly lower than those of CNC milling technology. Additionally, 3D printing was also shown to be more time-efficient.
Using additive manufacturing technology to produce restorations with a thickness ranging from 0.1 to 0.2 mm is indeed feasible. The high accuracy of these restorations, contributes to their ability to resist caries progression, surpassing the minimum clinical threshold load of failure by a significant margin and reliable adhesion. However, before 3D-printed resin restorations can be widely adopted for clinical applications, further improvements are needed, particularly in terms of reducing their susceptibility to stains.
3D-printed intracoronal restorations and veneers are more time and cost-efficient, more accurate, and could provide a considerable alternative to the currently applied CNC milling. Some limitations still accompany the resin materials, but this could be overcome by further development of the materials and printing technology.
评估制作 3D 打印牙体内部修复体、超薄贴面的可行性,并比较它们的机械性能、精度、生物性能和染色敏感性与目前应用的铣削修复体。
全面检索了截至 2024 年 1 月的相关记录,无语言限制。检索了所有评估 3D 打印部分覆盖修复体(嵌体、高嵌体、贴面和牙面贴面)的研究。
网络搜索共得到 1142 条记录,后期又从网站上添加了 8 条记录。最终只有 17 条记录被纳入综述。纳入的记录比较了 3D 打印、氧化铝基和氧化锆陶瓷、锂硅二酸盐陶瓷、聚合物渗透陶瓷、聚醚醚酮(PEEK)、树脂复合材料和丙烯酸树脂与其数控铣削类似物。汇总数据表明,制作厚度小于 0.2mm 的超薄修复体是可行的。3D 打印贴面和牙体内部修复体在准确性、边缘和内部适合性方面优于铣削修复体(p<0.05)。然而,需要注意的是,材料的选择和制备设计可能会影响这些结果。在成本方面,3D 打印的初始投资和生产费用明显低于数控铣削技术。此外,3D 打印的效率也更高。
使用增材制造技术制作厚度在 0.1 到 0.2mm 之间的修复体是可行的。这些修复体的高精度有助于抵抗龋齿进展,显著超过失败的最小临床阈值负荷,并具有可靠的附着力。然而,在 3D 打印树脂修复体广泛应用于临床之前,还需要进一步改进,特别是降低其染色敏感性。
3D 打印牙体内部修复体和贴面更省时、成本效益更高、更准确,可以为目前应用的数控铣削提供一个很好的替代方案。树脂材料仍存在一些局限性,但通过进一步开发材料和打印技术可以克服这些问题。