The influence of printing angle on color and translucency of 3D printed resins for dental restorations

Espinar, Cristina; Bona, Álvaro Della; Pérez, María M.; Tejada-Casado, Maria; Pulgar, Rosa

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2023.03.011

Cited by 26 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…52 However, when non-ideal backgrounds are used, such as the color of the backings in color difference determinations, the RTP is necessary. 20 In our study, translucency calculations were performed as recommended by previous studies. 20,52 According to our study, the highest RTP 00 values were observed the combination of O with GC group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The RTP 00 values were calculated using the CIEDE2000 color formula, as follows 20,21,52 :

{italicRTP}_{00} = \begin{array}{l} [{(\frac{L_{B}^{'} - L_{W}^{'}}{k_{L} S_{L}})}^{2} + {(\frac{C_{B}^{'} - C_{W}^{'}}{k_{C} S_{C}})}^{2} + {(\frac{H_{B}^{'} - H_{W}^{'}}{k_{H} S_{H}})}^{2} \\ {goodbreak+ R_{T} (\frac{C_{B}^{'} - C_{W}^{'}}{k_{C} S_{C}}) (\frac{H_{B}^{'} - H_{W}^{'}}{k_{H} S_{H}}) true]}^{1 / 2} \end{array}

Subscript B in this formula refers to the color parameter obtained on a black background, while subscript W refers to the color parameter obtained on a white background. The other terms within the formula have been previously stated in detail 20,21 . The relative translucency parameter difference (ΔRTP 00 ) was calculated (before aging–after aging).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Translucency variation should be evaluated by comparing it with reliable 50%:50% translucency thresholds. 20,21 Previous studies, indicated that resin content differences of resin composite materials cause differences in optical properties. [22][23][24][25][26] In vitro studies use thermal cycling to simulate the aging process of dental materials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effect of aging and fiber‐reinforcement on color stability, translucency, and microhardness of single‐shade resin composites versus multi‐shade resin composite

Fidan,

Yağci

2023

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of aging and fiber‐reinforcement on the color stability, translucency, and microhardness of single‐shade resin composites versus multi‐shade resin composite.Materials and MethodsFour resin composites (Filtek Z250, Omnichroma, Vittra APS Unique, Zenchroma) were tested. Three subgroups of specimens were prepared for each of the composites: control, polyethylene fiber‐reinforcement, and glass fiber‐reinforcement‐ groups (n = 10/per group). The samples were subjected to aging for 10,000 thermal cycles. Color differences (ΔE00) were calculated after aging. Relative translucency parameter (RTP00) and microhardness values were calculated before and after aging. A two‐way analysis of variance and the generalized linear model was used (p < 0.05).ResultsThe lowest and highest ΔE00 values were found for Filtek Z250 (0.6 ± 0.2) and Omnichroma resin composites (1.6 ± 0.4), respectively. The ΔE00 value of the polyethylene fiber‐reinforcement group (1.2 ± 0.6) was significantly higher than the ΔE00 value of the glass fiber‐reinforcement group (1.0 ± 0.4, p < 0.001). The RTP00 value of the glass fiber‐reinforcement group (1.92 ± 0.78) was significantly higher than the RTP00 value of the polyethylene fiber‐reinforcement group (1.72 ± 0.77, p < 0.001). The highest microhardness values were found in glass fiber‐reinforcement group (76.48 ± 17.07, p < 0.001).ConclusionSingle‐shade resin composites were more translucent, had higher color change, and lower hardness than multi‐shade resin composite. For relative translucency and microhardness, statistical significance was found in the material and fiber type interaction. The glass fiber‐reinforcement provided higher translucency, lower color change and higher microhardness values than polyethylene fiber‐reinforcement group after aging. Thermocycling had a significant impact on the color stability, translucency parameter, and microhardness of the tested resin composite materials.Clinical SignificanceSingle‐shade resin composite materials have greater color‐changing potential. The glass fiber‐reinforcement optimize resin material mechanical properties and color stability more than polyethylene fiber‐reinforcement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The RTP 00 values were calculated using the CIEDE2000 color formula, as follows 20,21,52 :

{italicRTP}_{00} = \begin{array}{l} [{(\frac{L_{B}^{'} - L_{W}^{'}}{k_{L} S_{L}})}^{2} + {(\frac{C_{B}^{'} - C_{W}^{'}}{k_{C} S_{C}})}^{2} + {(\frac{H_{B}^{'} - H_{W}^{'}}{k_{H} S_{H}})}^{2} \\ {goodbreak+ R_{T} (\frac{C_{B}^{'} - C_{W}^{'}}{k_{C} S_{C}}) (\frac{H_{B}^{'} - H_{W}^{'}}{k_{H} S_{H}}) true]}^{1 / 2} \end{array}

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of aging and fiber‐reinforcement on color stability, translucency, and microhardness of single‐shade resin composites versus multi‐shade resin composite

Fidan,

Yağci

2023

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The materials evaluated in this study are included in Table 1 along with a description of the clinical uses and composition as provided by the respective manufacturers. [27][28][29][30][31] A light-cured resin composite, milled resin composite, and lithium disilicate milled ceramic were chosen as reference materials as they were expected to have mechanical properties near the 3D-printed resins included in this study. All 3Dprinted resin materials were printed in a vat digital light processing (DLP) printer (Pro 55, SprintRay, Los Angeles, CA).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shorter 3-point bend flexural strength specimens tend to have higher flexural strength values as there is a lower probability that a critical flaw will be present in a shorter span. In order to compare the values obtained in this study to those of the manufacturers of the 3D-printed resins (>50 MPa C&B MFH, 150 ± 25 MPa Ceramic Crown, 147 MPa OnX),29,30 it would be necessary to know the exact specimen dimension and testing apparatus used by their manufacturers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of materials used for 3D printing dental crowns and hybrid prostheses

Bora,

Sayed Ahmed,

Alford

et al. 2023

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo compare the filler weight percentage (wt%), filler and resin composition, flexural strength, modulus, and hardness of several 3D‐printed resins to direct and indirect restorative materials.Materials and MethodsFour 3D‐printed resins (C&B MFH, Ceramic Crown, OnX, and OnX Tough), one milled resin composite (Lava Ultimate), one conventional composite (Filtek Supreme), and one ceramic (IPS e.max CAD) were evaluated. Filler wt% was determined by the burned ash technique, and filler particle morphology and composition were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy and energy‐dispersive spectroscopy, respectively. Organic resin composition was analyzed by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. Three‐point bend flexural strength and modulus of the materials were determined by ISO 4049 or ISO 6872. Vickers microhardness was measured. Data were compared with a one‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc analysis. Linear regression analysis was performed for filler wt% versus flexural strength, modulus, and hardness.Results3D‐printed resins were composed of various sized and shaped silica fillers and various types of methacrylate resins. Significant differences were found among filler wt% with some materials around 3% (C&B MFH), others between 33% and 38% (OnX Tough and OnX), others around 50% (Ceramic Crown), and some around 72% (Filtek Supreme and Lava Ultimate). All 3D‐printed resins had significantly lower flexural strength, modulus, and hardness than the conventional and milled resin composites and ceramic material (p < 0.001). Filler wt% demonstrated a linear relationship with modulus (p = 0.013, R2 = 0.821) and hardness (p = 0.018, R2 = 0.787) but not flexural strength (p = 0.056, R2 = 0.551).Conclusions3D‐printed resins contain from 3% to 50% filler content. Filler wt% alone does not affect flexural strength, but strength may be affected by resin composition as well. Although the 3D‐printed resins had lower flexural strength, modulus, and hardness than milled and conventional composite and ceramic, they demonstrated nonbrittle plastic behavior.Clinical SignificanceThe properties of 3D‐printed resins vary based on their composition, which affects their clinical applications.

show abstract

Does the internal surface treatment technique for enhanced bonding affect the color, transparency, and surface roughness of ultra-transparent zirconia?

Chen,

Zhou,

et al. 2024

Clin Oral Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influence of printing angle on color and translucency of 3D printed resins for dental restorations

Cited by 26 publications

References 36 publications

Effect of aging and fiber‐reinforcement on color stability, translucency, and microhardness of single‐shade resin composites versus multi‐shade resin composite

Effect of aging and fiber‐reinforcement on color stability, translucency, and microhardness of single‐shade resin composites versus multi‐shade resin composite

Characterization of materials used for 3D printing dental crowns and hybrid prostheses

Does the internal surface treatment technique for enhanced bonding affect the color, transparency, and surface roughness of ultra-transparent zirconia?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About