Abstract

Biocompatibility is important for the 3D printing of resins used in medical devices and can be affected by photoinitiators, one of the key additives used in the 3D printing process. The choice of ingredients must be considered, as the toxicity varies depending on the photoinitiator, and unreacted photoinitiator may leach out of the polymerized resin. In this study, the use of ethyl (2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl) phenylphosphinate (TPO-L) as a photoinitiator for the 3D printing of resin was considered for application in medical device production, where the cytotoxicity, colour stability, dimensional accuracy, degree of conversion, and mechanical/physical properties were evaluated. Along with TPO-L, two conventional photoinitiators, phenylbis (2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl) phosphine oxide (BAPO) and diphenyl (2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl) phosphine oxide (TPO), were considered. A total of 0.1 mol% of each photoinitiator was mixed with the resin matrix to prepare a resin mixture for 3D printing. The specimens were printed using a direct light processing (DLP) type 3D printer. The 3D-printed specimens were postprocessed and evaluated for cytotoxicity, colour stability, dimensional accuracy, degree of conversion, and mechanical properties in accordance with international standards and the methods described in previous studies. The TPO-L photoinitiator showed excellent biocompatibility and colour stability and possessed with an acceptable dimensional accuracy for use in the 3D printing of resins. Therefore, the TPO-L photoinitiator can be sufficiently used as a photoinitiator for dental 3D-printed resin.

Highlights

  • Introduction published maps and institutional affilTraditional dental prostheses have been manufactured in multiple stages

  • Limited studies have applied TPO-L to the 3D printing of dental resins to solve the problems associated with BAPO and TPO photoinitiators

  • BAPO and TPO photoinitiators, which are mainly used for 3D printing, have disadvantages such as cytotoxicity and discolouration

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Traditional dental prostheses have been manufactured in multiple stages. Conventional fabrication methods involve recording an impression of the treatment site, pouring a stone model and constructing a wax pattern. The wax pattern is invested and replaced with a permanent material such as metal, ceramic, or acrylic resin. The computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system has had a major impact on the dental field by simplifying the process and reducing the production time [1,2]. Types of dental 3D printing methods include fused deposition modelling (FDM), material jetting (MJ), selective laser doping (SLS), stereolithography (SLA), and digital light processing (DLP). Among these 3D printing methods, digital light processing (DLP) is a promising technology in dental applications iations

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
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