IADR Abstract Archives
Change in Surface Microhardness of 3D-Printed Resins Immersed in Liquid
Objectives: To measure changes in surface microhardness of four 3D-printed resins following six days of immersion in liquid.
Methods: Four 3D-printed dental resins were used to fabricate 10mm x 2mm disks: Formlabs Permanent Crown Resin (Formlabs, Somerville, MA), SprintRay Ceramic Crown (SprintRay, Los Angeles, CA) SprintRay Crown by BEGO, and SprintRay OnX. Samples were printed following manufacturer instructions for printing and post-print processing. Printed samples were stored at approximately 25°C for up to ten days before wet grinding/polishing through 1200-grit paper (AutoMet 250 Grinder/Polisher, Buehler, Lake Bluff, IL). Surface microhardness values of each sample were measured using a Wilson VH1102 Knoop hardness tester (Buehler). Following baseline testing, samples were immersed in red wine (37°C) for 6 days, rinsed with RO water, and hardness values were measured again.
A repeated measures ANOVA was used to test for differences in microhardness by 3D-printed restorative material after soaking (α=0.05). Additionally, the percent difference in pre- and post-immersion microhardness values was calculated.
Results: All data were normally distributed. Results showed a significant decrease in microhardness by 3D-printed material over time (p-value<0.05, F=3.190, Fig. 1). Percent difference data show that SprintRay Crown by BEGO had the lowest decrease in hardness, while Formlabs Permanent Crown Resin had the highest decrease (see table).
Conclusions: Our results suggest that current 3-D printed dental materials tested in this study are susceptible to water sorption and softening of the surface after as little as six days of fluid immersion at 37°C. As such, these materials may not provide a long-term service life in vivo.
Methods: Four 3D-printed dental resins were used to fabricate 10mm x 2mm disks: Formlabs Permanent Crown Resin (Formlabs, Somerville, MA), SprintRay Ceramic Crown (SprintRay, Los Angeles, CA) SprintRay Crown by BEGO, and SprintRay OnX. Samples were printed following manufacturer instructions for printing and post-print processing. Printed samples were stored at approximately 25°C for up to ten days before wet grinding/polishing through 1200-grit paper (AutoMet 250 Grinder/Polisher, Buehler, Lake Bluff, IL). Surface microhardness values of each sample were measured using a Wilson VH1102 Knoop hardness tester (Buehler). Following baseline testing, samples were immersed in red wine (37°C) for 6 days, rinsed with RO water, and hardness values were measured again.
A repeated measures ANOVA was used to test for differences in microhardness by 3D-printed restorative material after soaking (α=0.05). Additionally, the percent difference in pre- and post-immersion microhardness values was calculated.
Results: All data were normally distributed. Results showed a significant decrease in microhardness by 3D-printed material over time (p-value<0.05, F=3.190, Fig. 1). Percent difference data show that SprintRay Crown by BEGO had the lowest decrease in hardness, while Formlabs Permanent Crown Resin had the highest decrease (see table).
Conclusions: Our results suggest that current 3-D printed dental materials tested in this study are susceptible to water sorption and softening of the surface after as little as six days of fluid immersion at 37°C. As such, these materials may not provide a long-term service life in vivo.
IMAGES
4011020_File000000.jpg
4011020_File000000.jpg