Advertisement
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Failure load of milled, 3D-printed, and conventional chairside-dispensed interim 3-unit fixed dental prostheses

Published:December 10, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.11.005

      Abstract

      Statement of problem

      New techniques and materials for the laboratory fabrication of interim fixed dental prostheses have gained in popularity, yet how their failure strengths compare with conventional chairside materials is unclear.

      Purpose

      The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the strength of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) milled polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) or 3-dimensionally (3D) printed bis-acryl interim fixed dental prostheses with a traditional chairside-dispensed autopolymerizing bis-acryl prosthesis while taking into account the effect of loading rate and storage time.

      Material and methods

      A dentiform mandibular second premolar and second molar with a first molar pontic were prepared and scanned. Three groups of 3-unit interim fixed dental prostheses were fabricated: milled PMMA, 3D-printed bis-acryl, and chairside-dispensed autopolymerizing bis-acryl. The interim prostheses were evaluated for fit with a silicone disclosing material and cemented onto 3D-printed resin dies. The specimens were stored in 100% humidity at 37 °C. After 1 or 30 days of storage, the cemented interim prostheses were loaded to failure in a universal testing machine at 1 or 10 mm/min (n=15/group). Failure loads were analyzed by 3-way analysis of variance and multiple comparisons (α=.05).

      Results

      Mean ±standard deviation failure loads ranged from 363 ±93 N (3D-printed bis-acryl, 30 days, 1 mm/min) to 729 ±113 N (milled PMMA, 24 hours, 1 mm/min). Loading rate did not significantly affect failure load of the interim prostheses (P=.306). After 30 days of storage in 100% humidity, the failure load of milled PMMA and 3D-printed bis-acryl interim prostheses decreased significantly, but the chairside autopolymerizing bis-acryl prostheses were not affected. After 30 days of storage, the failure loads of milled PMMA and chairside autopolymerizing bis-acryl were not significantly different.

      Conclusions

      Regardless of loading rate, interim fixed dental prostheses from milled PMMA had the highest initial strength 1 day after storage. Thirty days of exposure to humidity, however, reduced the strength of the CAD-CAM–manufactured interim prostheses, whereas the traditional chairside prostheses retained their strength.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Federick D.R.
        The provisional fixed partial denture.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1975; 34: 520-526
        • Yuodelis R.A.
        • Faucher R.
        Provisional restorations: an integrated approach to periodontics and restorative dentistry.
        Dent Clin North Am. 1980; 24: 285-303
        • Vahidi F.
        The provisional restoration.
        Dent Clin North Am. 1987; 31: 363-381
        • Burns D.R.
        • Beck D.A.
        • Nelson S.K.
        A review of selected dental literature on contemporary provisional fixed prosthodontic treatment: report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 90: 474-497
        • Hahnel S.
        • Krifka S.
        • Behr M.
        • Kolbeck C.
        • Lang R.
        • Rosentritt M.
        Performance of resin materials for temporary fixed denture prostheses.
        J Oral Sci. 2019; 61: 270-275
        • Nejatidanesh F.
        • Momeni G.
        • Savabi O.
        Flexural strength of interim resin materials for fixed prosthodontics.
        J Prosthodont. 2009; 18: 507-511
        • Abdulmohsen B.
        • Parker S.
        • Braden M.
        • Patel M.P.
        A study to investigate and compare the physicomechanical properties of experimental and commercial temporary crown and bridge materials.
        Dent Mater. 2016; 32: 200-210
        • Singh A.
        • Garg S.
        Comparative evaluation of flexural strength of provisional crown and bridge materials-an in vitro study.
        J Clin Diagn Res. 2016; 10: ZC72-ZC77
        • Sapuan S.M.
        • Nukman Y.
        • Osman N.A.
        • Ilyas R.A.
        Composites in biomedical applications.
        CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL2020: 72-93
        • Astudillo-Rubio D.
        • Delgado-Gaete A.
        • Bellot-Arcís C.
        • Montiel-Company J.M.
        • Pascual-Moscardó A.
        • Almerich-Silla J.M.
        Mechanical properties of provisional dental materials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        PLoS One. 2018; 13: e0193162
        • Lee J.
        • Clark S.R.
        • Tantbirojn D.
        • Korioth T.V.P.
        • Hill A.E.
        • Versluis A.
        Strength and stiffness of interim materials and interim fixed dental prostheses when tested at different loading rates.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2022; 127: 161-167
        • Haselton D.R.
        • Diaz-Arnold A.M.
        • Vargas M.A.
        Flexural strength of provisional crown and fixed partial denture resins.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2002; 87: 225-228
        • Balkenhol M.
        • Ferger P.
        • Mautner M.C.
        • Wöstmann B.
        Provisional crown and fixed partial denture materials: mechanical properties and degree of conversion.
        Dent Mater. 2007; 23: 1574-1583
        • Kerby R.E.
        • Knobloch L.A.
        • Sharples S.
        • Peregrina A.
        Mechanical properties of urethane and bis-acryl interim resin materials.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 110: 21-28
        • Douglas W.H.
        Considerations for modeling.
        Dent Mater. 1996; 12: 203-207
        • Alt V.
        • Hannig M.
        • Wöstmann B.
        • Balkenhol M.
        Fracture strength of temporary fixed partial dentures: CAD/CAM versus directly fabricated restorations.
        Dent Mater. 2011; 27: 339-347
        • Van der Bilt A.
        • Abbink J.H.
        The influence of food consistency on chewing rate and muscular work.
        Arch Oral Biol. 2017; 83: 105-110
        • Alp G.
        • Murat S.
        • Yilmaz B.
        Comparison of flexural strength of different CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymers.
        J Prosthodont. 2019; 28: e491-e495
        • Rayyan M.M.
        • Aboushelib M.
        • Sayed N.M.
        • Ibrahim A.
        • Jimbo R.
        Comparison of interim restorations fabricated by CAD/CAM with those fabricated manually.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114: 414-419
        • Srinivasan M.
        • Gjengedal H.
        • Cattani-Lorente M.
        • Moussa M.
        • Durual S.
        • Schimmel M.
        • et al.
        CAD/CAM milled complete removable dental prostheses: an in vitro evaluation of biocompatibility, mechanical properties, and surface roughness.
        Dent Mater J. 2018; 37: 526-533
        • Sadid-Zadeh R.
        • Zirkel C.
        • Makwoka S.
        • Li R.
        Fracture strength of interim CAD/CAM and conventional partial fixed dental prostheses.
        J Prosthodont. 2021; 30: 720-724
        • Mai H.N.
        • Lee K.B.
        • Lee D.H.
        Fit of interim crowns fabricated using photopolymer-jetting 3D printing.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2017; 118: 208-215
        • Shibasaki S.
        • Takamizawa T.
        • Suzuki T.
        • Nojiri K.
        • Tsujimoto A.
        • Barkmeier W.W.
        • et al.
        Influence of different curing modes on polymerization behavior and mechanical properties of dual-cured provisional resins.
        Oper Dent. 2017; 42: 526-536
        • Peng C.C.
        • Chung K.H.
        • Ramos Jr., V.
        Assessment of the adaptation of interim crowns using different measurement techniques.
        J Prosthodont. 2020; 29: 87-93
        • Revilla-León M.
        • Meyers M.J.
        • Zandinejad A.
        • Özcan M.
        A review on chemical composition, mechanical properties, and manufacturing work flow of additively manufactured current polymers for interim dental restorations.
        J Esthet Restor Dent. 2019; 31: 51-57
        • Reymus M.
        • Fabritius R.
        • Keßler A.
        • Hickel R.
        • Edelhoff D.
        • Stawarczyk B.
        Fracture load of 3D-printed fixed dental prostheses compared with milled and conventionally fabricated ones: the impact of resin material, build direction, post-curing, and artificial aging—an in vitro study.
        Clin Oral Investig. 2020; 24: 701-710
        • Tahayeri A.
        • Morgan M.
        • Fugolin A.P.
        • Bompolaki D.
        • Athirasala A.
        • Pfeifer C.S.
        • et al.
        3D printed versus conventionally cured provisional crown and bridge dental materials.
        Dent Mater. 2018; 34: 192-200
        • Digholkar S.
        • Madhav V.N.V.
        • Palaskar J.
        Evaluation of the flexural strength and microhardness of provisional crown and bridge materials fabricated by different methods.
        J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2016; 16: 328-334
        • Söderholm K.J.
        • Zigan M.
        • Ragan M.
        • Fischlschweiger W.
        • Berman M.
        Hydrolytic degradation of dental composites.
        J Dent Res. 1984; 63: 1248-1254
        • Lang R.
        • Rosentritt M.
        • Behr M.
        • Handel G.
        Fracture resistance of PMMA and resin matrix composite-based interim FPD materials.
        Int J Prosthodont. 2003; 16: 381-384
        • Berli C.
        • Thieringer F.M.
        • Sharma N.
        • Müller J.A.
        • Dedem P.
        • Fischer J.
        • et al.
        Comparing the mechanical properties of pressed, milled, and 3D-printed resins for occlusal devices.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2020; 124: 780-786
        • Miettinen V.M.
        • Vallittu P.K.
        • Docent D.T.
        Water sorption and solubility of glass fiber-reinforced denture polymethyl methacrylate resin.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1997; 77: 531-534
        • Schwantz J.K.
        • Oliveira-Ogliari A.
        • Meereis C.T.
        • Leal F.B.
        • Ogliari F.A.
        • Moraes R.R.
        Characterization of bis-acryl composite resins for provisional restorations.
        Braz Dent J. 2017; 28: 354-361
        • Christensen G.J.
        Marginal fit of gold inlay castings.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1966; 16: 297-305