IADR Abstract Archives
Volumetric Wear of Double Cross-Linked Polymer Teeth and 3D-Printed Teeth
Objectives: To compare the volumetric wear of double cross-linked polymer teeth and 3D printed teeth in simulated conditions.
.
Methods: 30 first upper right premolars with a double cross-linked polymeric structure were used as controls. For the test group, 30 premolar 3D-printed replicas were used. Printing parameters were: 25μm layer thickness, 25-degree printing angle, occlusal surface facing down, and supports at buccal and lingual cusps. Post-processing was completed as follows: removal of the teeth from the printing platform, 10 minutes wash in isopropyl alcohol (IPA 96%), supports removal, drying, second wash for 5 minutes in IPA 96%, and UV-light final curing during 40 minutes at 60 Celsius degree. The samples (N=60) were scanned in a 3D digital microscope using vertical scanning steps of 5 microns, thus a 3D model from each tooth was obtained. Afterward the supports with the teeth were transferred to the wear testing unit. The wear test was completed against 800 coarse paper under a compressive bi-directional force of 200gr and for 10,000Hz (2 years) in a wet environment. A second scanner was completed and compared to the original. Normality test was completed, repeated measures (within-subjects) ANOVA was performed to determine volume loss within groups. One-Way ANOVA was completed to determine differences between groups. Significance was set as p<0.05.
Results: Test groups demonstrated (39±3.6%) volume loss, compared to the control groups (29±2.2%). When comparing the test versus the control groups, higher volume loss was observed at test groups (p=0.031).
Conclusions: The double cross-linked polymer teeth suffer less volume wear than 3D printed teeth in simulated bi-directional grinding conditions.
.
Methods: 30 first upper right premolars with a double cross-linked polymeric structure were used as controls. For the test group, 30 premolar 3D-printed replicas were used. Printing parameters were: 25μm layer thickness, 25-degree printing angle, occlusal surface facing down, and supports at buccal and lingual cusps. Post-processing was completed as follows: removal of the teeth from the printing platform, 10 minutes wash in isopropyl alcohol (IPA 96%), supports removal, drying, second wash for 5 minutes in IPA 96%, and UV-light final curing during 40 minutes at 60 Celsius degree. The samples (N=60) were scanned in a 3D digital microscope using vertical scanning steps of 5 microns, thus a 3D model from each tooth was obtained. Afterward the supports with the teeth were transferred to the wear testing unit. The wear test was completed against 800 coarse paper under a compressive bi-directional force of 200gr and for 10,000Hz (2 years) in a wet environment. A second scanner was completed and compared to the original. Normality test was completed, repeated measures (within-subjects) ANOVA was performed to determine volume loss within groups. One-Way ANOVA was completed to determine differences between groups. Significance was set as p<0.05.
Results: Test groups demonstrated (39±3.6%) volume loss, compared to the control groups (29±2.2%). When comparing the test versus the control groups, higher volume loss was observed at test groups (p=0.031).
Conclusions: The double cross-linked polymer teeth suffer less volume wear than 3D printed teeth in simulated bi-directional grinding conditions.