Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2024
Effect of cleaning solution on surface properties of 3D-printed denture materials.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Santi Marina Rodrigues, Khodor Nadima, Sekula Michael, Donatelli David, De Souza Grace Mendonça
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of cleaning solutions on surface properties of 3D-printed resins.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven different resin materials for denture base and teeth were used in the form of 280 half-disks. Samples were randomly assigned to two cleaning groups (FD, FreshDent; PO, Polydent), with daily 2- or 3-min immersion followed by water storage, repeated for 30 days. Samples were then cleaned in an ultrasonic bath with water and analyzed for surface roughness (Keyence, VHX-7000N) and hardness (Shimadzu, HMV-2 series). The pH of cleaning solutions was analyzed over 5-min and the surface morphology of specimens was analyzed via scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Statistical analysis used two-way ANOVA (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: Surface roughness of base materials was significantly affected (p < 0.001), whereas roughness of teeth materials was not. As for hardness, there was a significant interaction between materials and cleaning solution for both, base (p < 0.001) and teeth (p < 0.001). For teeth materials, PO significantly increased Denture's (Dentca) hardness and decreased that of Rodin's (Pac Dent), while PO significantly increased Rodin's Base (Pac Dent) hardness. The hardness of Flexcera Ultra (Envision Tec), Glidewell (Glidewell), Lucitone (Dentsply Sirona), and NextDent (NextDent) teeth and base materials were not affected by the cleaning solution. Overall, the pH of FD averaged 7.3 and PO averaged 6.6. All the SEM images indicated surface irregularities after immersion in either FD or PO.
CONCLUSIONS: One-month of storage and cyclic cleaning of 3D- printed resins did not affect surface roughness but had a significant impact on hardness. The cleaning solutions' effect was not homogeneous among materials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven different resin materials for denture base and teeth were used in the form of 280 half-disks. Samples were randomly assigned to two cleaning groups (FD, FreshDent; PO, Polydent), with daily 2- or 3-min immersion followed by water storage, repeated for 30 days. Samples were then cleaned in an ultrasonic bath with water and analyzed for surface roughness (Keyence, VHX-7000N) and hardness (Shimadzu, HMV-2 series). The pH of cleaning solutions was analyzed over 5-min and the surface morphology of specimens was analyzed via scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Statistical analysis used two-way ANOVA (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: Surface roughness of base materials was significantly affected (p < 0.001), whereas roughness of teeth materials was not. As for hardness, there was a significant interaction between materials and cleaning solution for both, base (p < 0.001) and teeth (p < 0.001). For teeth materials, PO significantly increased Denture's (Dentca) hardness and decreased that of Rodin's (Pac Dent), while PO significantly increased Rodin's Base (Pac Dent) hardness. The hardness of Flexcera Ultra (Envision Tec), Glidewell (Glidewell), Lucitone (Dentsply Sirona), and NextDent (NextDent) teeth and base materials were not affected by the cleaning solution. Overall, the pH of FD averaged 7.3 and PO averaged 6.6. All the SEM images indicated surface irregularities after immersion in either FD or PO.
CONCLUSIONS: One-month of storage and cyclic cleaning of 3D- printed resins did not affect surface roughness but had a significant impact on hardness. The cleaning solutions' effect was not homogeneous among materials.