Abstract

BackgroundIn dentistry, there is a growing preference for computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) systems over traditional laboratory procedures. However, there is not much literature comparing various CAD/CAM materials. Thus, this study aimed to assess and compare the color stability and hardness of gingival and tooth colored milled and 3D-printed acrylic resins.Materials and methodsFour types of CAD/CAM materials were prepared: 3D-printed pink shade (PP), milled polymenthymethacrylate (PMMA) pink shade (MP), 3D-printed tooth shade (PT) and milled PMMA tooth shade (MT) (n = 6). For hardness, disc shaped samples of 15 mm × 2 mm and for color stability, bar shaped samples of 65mmx10mmx2.5 mm were prepared and polished. Vickers hardness test was performed in a microhardness tester. Color stability test was done by immersing in coffee solution and coca cola for 7 days. Day 0 and day 7 measurements were recorded using a digital spectrophotometer and the change in color was calculated. For statistical analysis, one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc tests were done.ResultsFor color stability, milled PMMA was superior to 3D-printed resin samples. Milled pink and tooth shade samples had similar color stability, whereas 3D-printed tooth shade samples were more color stable as compared to pink shade 3D-printed samples. For hardness, milled tooth shade PMMA was the most superior one, followed by 3D-printed tooth shade, whereas pink shade milled PMMA and 3D-printed resin samples had similar hardness values and were inferior to the tooth shade CAD/CAM materials.ConclusionColor stability of milled PMMA is superior to that of 3D-printed resins. Hardness of tooth shade milled and 3D-printed resins is more than that of pink shade milled and 3D-printed resins.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call