Rizzante Fabio, Hales Hannah, Teich Sorin, Furuse Adilson Yoshio, Mendonça Gustavo, Brennes Christian
Assistant Dean for Innovation, James B. Edwards College of Dental Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
Dentist, Private Practice, Charleston, SC, USA.
Odontology. 2025 Apr;113(2):542-548. doi: 10.1007/s10266-024-00985-3. Epub 2024 Aug 13.
This research analyzed the effect of the manufacturing method on the flexural strength and color stability of 3D-printed resins used for producing indirect restorations. For this, two dental restorative biocompatible resin materials, OnX (OnX, SprintRay) and CB (Crown and Bridge, Dentca), were divided into 2 groups according with manufacturing method (printed with a Pro95 3D printer - SprintRay; and not printed, with samples obtained with the fluid resin being poured on PVS molds for further light activation in the post-curing process), and subdivided into 2 groups according to the post-curing method: VG (Valo Grand, Ultradent Products) for 120 s and PC (Procure 2, SprintRay). Bar-shaped samples were used to evaluate the flexural strength 24 h after storage in distilled water at 37 °C using a universal testing machine. Disk-shaped samples were used to evaluate the color stability with a spectrophotometer at baseline, after 1-7 days in dark dry storage at 37 °C, and after 1 day of artificial aging in water at 60 °C. Data were evaluated using 3-way ANOVA (flexural strength) and 4-way repeated measures ANOVA (color stability), followed by the Tukey's HSD test (α = .05). Flexural strength showed significant results for resin (p < .001), while manufacturing and post-curing methods were not significant (p > .05). The interaction effects between resin and manufacturing method (p = .978), and between resin, manufacturing method and post-curing method (p = .659) were not significant. In general, OnX showed higher flexural strength values than CB, regardless of manufacturing method or post-curing protocol. Color stability results showed significant results for resin (p < .001), time (p < .001), resin and time (p = .029), and resin and curing method (p < .001), but no differences considering resin and manufacturing mode (p = .87), or resin, manufacturing method and curing method (p = .35). In general, OnX showed a higher color change than CB, longer storage times resulted in increased color change for both materials, and CB cured with VG showed lower color alteration than CB cured with PC2. The manufacturing method (3D printed or not 3D printed) does not seem to influence the flexural strength and color stability of 3D printed resins. This may indicate that, at least from a physical-mechanical perspective, the final properties of the material are mainly dependent on the post-curing process.
本研究分析了制造方法对用于制作间接修复体的3D打印树脂的弯曲强度和颜色稳定性的影响。为此，将两种牙科修复用生物相容性树脂材料OnX（OnX，SprintRay）和CB（冠桥，Dentca）根据制造方法分为2组（用Pro95 3D打印机打印 - SprintRay；未打印，将液态树脂倒入PVS模具中，在后期固化过程中进行进一步光活化以获取样品），并根据后期固化方法再细分为2组：用Valo Grand（UltraDent Products）进行120秒固化和用Procure 2（SprintRay）进行固化。使用条形样品，在37°C蒸馏水中储存24小时后，使用万能试验机评估弯曲强度。使用圆盘形样品，在基线、37°C黑暗干燥储存1 - 7天后以及在60°C水中进行1天人工老化后，用分光光度计评估颜色稳定性。数据使用三因素方差分析（弯曲强度）和四因素重复测量方差分析（颜色稳定性）进行评估，随后进行Tukey's HSD检验（α = 0.05）。弯曲强度方面，树脂显示出显著结果（p < 0.001），而制造方法和后期固化方法不显著（p > 0.05）。树脂与制造方法之间的交互作用（p = 0.978）以及树脂、制造方法和后期固化方法之间的交互作用（p = 0.659）不显著。总体而言，无论制造方法或后期固化方案如何，OnX的弯曲强度值均高于CB。颜色稳定性结果显示，树脂（p < 0.001）、时间（p < 0.001）、树脂与时间（p = 0.029）以及树脂与固化方法（p < 0.001）有显著结果，但考虑树脂与制造方式（p = 0.87）或树脂、制造方法与固化方法（p = 0.35）时无差异。总体而言，OnX的颜色变化高于CB，两种材料储存时间越长颜色变化越大，用Valo Grand固化的CB比用Procure 2固化的CB颜色变化小。制造方法（是否3D打印）似乎不影响3D打印树脂的弯曲强度和颜色稳定性。这可能表明，至少从物理力学角度来看，材料的最终性能主要取决于后期固化过程。
