Cargando…
Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed Occlusal Splint Materials
Data regarding the mechanical properties of three-dimensionally (3D) printed materials for occlusal splint manufacturing are scarce. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the flexural strength and surface hardness of modern 3D-printed occlusal splint materials and compare them with two contro...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10453325/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37623295 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj11080199 |
Sumario: | Data regarding the mechanical properties of three-dimensionally (3D) printed materials for occlusal splint manufacturing are scarce. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the flexural strength and surface hardness of modern 3D-printed occlusal splint materials and compare them with two control groups, namely, milled and conventional cold-polymerized occlusal splint materials. A total of 140 rectangular specimens were manufactured for the present study. The specimens were prepared in accordance with the International Organization for Standardization standards (ISO 20795-1:2013). Five 3D-printed (NextDent Ortho Rigid, Dental LT Clear, Dentona Flexisplint, Cosmos Bite Splint, and ProArt Print Splint), one milled (ProArt CAD Splint), and one cold-polymerized (ProBase Cold) occlusal splint materials were used to determine flexural strength and surface hardness values. The three-point flexure test was used for the determination of flexural strength values, while Vickers hardness was measured to determine surface hardness. Ten specimens (n = 10) of each material were tested using these procedures. One-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post-hoc test were used to analyze the obtained results (α = 0.05). The values of flexural strength ranged from 46.1 ± 8.2 MPa to 106 ± 8.3 MPa. The Vickers hardness values ranged from 4.9 ± 0.5 VHN to 20.6 ± 1.3 VHN. Significant differences were found among the tested materials (p < 0.0001). The milled and cold-polymerized materials yielded higher values for both flexural strength (only one 3D-printed resin had comparable results to cold-polymerized acrylics) and surface hardness. There are differences in the mechanical properties of the various tested occlusal splint materials. The flexural strength of most of the 3D-printed materials and their surface hardness values are still inferior when compared to the milled or cold-polymerized materials. |
---|