Does Printing Orientation Matter? In-Vitro Fracture Strength of Temporary Fixed Dental Prostheses after a 1-Year Simulation in the Artificial Mouth
Julian Nold, Christian Wesemann, Laura Rieg, Lara Binder, S. Witkowski, Benedikt C. Spies, Ralf‐Joachim Kohal
Abstract
Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD–CAM) enable subtractive or additive fabrication of temporary fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). The present in-vitro study aimed to compare the fracture resistance of both milled and additive manufactured three-unit FDPs and bar-shaped, ISO-conform specimens. Polymethylmethacrylate was used for subtractive manufacturing and a light-curing resin for additive manufacturing. Three (bars) and four (FDPs) different printing orientations were evaluated. All bars (n = 32) were subjected to a three-point bending test after 24 h of water storage. Half of the 80 FDPs were dynamically loaded (250,000 cycles, 98 N) with simultaneous hydrothermal cycling. Non-aged (n = 40) and surviving FDPs (n = 11) were subjected to static loading until fracture. Regarding the bar-shaped specimens, the milled group showed the highest flexural strength (114 ± 10 MPa, p = 0.001), followed by the vertically printed group (97 ± 10 MPa, p < 0.007). Subtractive manufactured FDPs revealed the highest fracture strength (1060 ± 89 N) with all specimens surviving dynamic loading. During artificial aging, 29 of 32 printed specimens failed. The present findings indicate that both printing orientation and aging affect the strength of additive manufactured specimens. The used resin and settings cannot be recommended for additive manufacturing of long-term temporary three-unit FDPs.