A study of tensile and bending properties of 3D-printed biocompatible materials used in dental appliances
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract In the last years, a large number of new biocompatible materials for 3D printers have emerged. Due to their recent appearance and rapid growth, there is little information about their mechanical properties. The design and manufacturing of oral appliances made with 3D printing technologies require knowledge of the mechanical properties of the biocompatible material used to achieve optimal performance for each application. This paper focuses on analysing the mechanical behaviour of a wide range of biocompatible materials using different additive manufacturing technologies. To this end, tensile and bending tests on different types of recent biocompatible materials used with 3D printers were conducted to evaluate the influence of the material, 3D printing technology, and printing orientation on the fragile/ductile behaviour of the manufactured devices. A test bench was used to perform tensile tests according to ASTM D638 and bending tests according to ISO 178. The specimens were manufactured with nine different materials and five manufacturing technologies. Furthermore, specimens were created with different printing technologies, biocompatible materials, and printing orientations. The maximum allowable stress, rupture stress, flexural modulus, and deformation in each of the tested specimens were recorded. Results suggest that specimens manufactured with Stereolithography (SLA) and milling (polymethyl methacrylate PMMA) achieved high maximum allowable and rupture stress values. It was also observed that Polyjet printing and Selective Laser Sintering technologies led to load–displacement curves with low maximum stress and high deformation values. Specimens manufactured with Digital Light Processing technology showed intermediate and homogeneous performance. Finally, it was observed that the printing direction significantly influences the mechanical properties of the manufactured specimens in some cases.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (44)
Show source-provided references
1. Alghazzawi TF (2016) Advancements in CAD/CAM technology: options for practical implementation. J Prosthodont Res 60:72–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2016.01.00310.1016/j.jpor.2016.01.003 ↗
2. Wai R, Chow TW, Pekka J (2016) Ceramic dental biomaterials and CAD/CAM technology: state of the art. J Prosthodont Res 58:208–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2014.07.00310.1016/j.jpor.2014.07.003 ↗
3. Joo H, Park S, Yun K, Lim H (2016) Complete-mouth rehabilitation using a 3D printing tecnique and the CAD/CAM double scanning method: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 116:3–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.00710.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.007 ↗
4. Noort RV (2012) The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater 28:3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.10.01410.1016/j.dental.2011.10.014 ↗
5. Susic I, Travar M, Susic M (2017) The application of CAD/CAM technology in dentistry. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/200/1/01202010.1088/1757-899X/200/1/012020 ↗
6. Mangano F, Gandolfi A, Luongo G, Logozzo S (2017) Intraoral scanners in dentistry: a review of the current literature. BMC Oral Health 17:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-017-0442-x10.1186/s12903-017-0442-x ↗
7. Richert R, Goujat A, Venet L et al (2017) Intraoral scanner technologies: a review to make a successful impression. J Healthc Eng. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/842759510.1155/2017/8427595 ↗
8. Granata S, Giberti L, Vigolo P, Stellini E, Di Fiore A (2020) Incorporating a facial scanner into the digital workflow: a dental technique. J Prosthet Dent 123(6):781–785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.02110.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.021 ↗
9. Di Fiore A, Meneghello R, Graiff L, Savio G, Vigolo P, Monaco C, Stellini E (2019) Full arch digital scanning systems performances for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: a comparative study of 8 intraoral scanners. J Prosthodont Res 63(4):396–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2019.04.00210.1016/j.jpor.2019.04.002 ↗
10. Jacobs R, Salmon B, Codari M, Hassan B, Bornstein MM (2018) Cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: recommendations for clinical use. BMC Oral Health 18:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0523-510.1186/s12903-018-0523-5 ↗
11. Mortadi NA, Eggbeer D, Lewis J, Williams RJ (2012) CAD/CAM/AM applications in the manufacture of dental appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 142:727–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.04.02310.1016/j.ajodo.2012.04.023 ↗
12. Ma B, Park T, Chun I, Yun K (2018) The accuracy of a 3D printing surgical guide determined by CBCT and model analysis. J Adv Prosthodont 10(4):279–285. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2018.10.4.27910.4047/jap.2018.10.4.279 ↗
13. Vilarrubi A, Pebe P, Rodriguez A (2011) Prótesis fija convencional libre de metal: tecnología CAD CAM-Zirconia, descripción de un caso clínico. Odontoestomalogia 13:16–28
14. Bacigalupe RD, Villablanca E (2015) Uso de coronas sistema cad-cam en implantes osteointegrados. Revista Méd Clín Las Condes 25:158–16510.1016/S0716-8640(14)70022-7 ↗
15. Salmi M, Paloheimo K, Tuomi J, Ingman T (2013) A Digital process for additive manufacturing of occlusal splints: a clinical pilot study. J R Soc Interface 10:20130203. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2013.020310.1098/rsif.2013.0203 ↗
16. Kravitz ND, Kusnoto B, Begole E, Obrez A, Agran B (2009) How well does Invisalign work? A prospective clinical study evaluating the efficacy of tooth movement with Invisalign. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 135:27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.05.01810.1016/j.ajodo.2007.05.018 ↗
17. Motohashi N, Kuroda T (1999) A 3D computer-aided design system applied to diagnosis and treatment planning in orthodontics and orthognathic surgery. Eur J 21:263–274. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/21.3.26310.1093/ejo/21.3.263 ↗
18. Schweiger J, Edelhoff D, Güth JF (2021) 3D printing in digital prosthetic dentistry: an overview of recent developments in additive manufacturing. J Clin Med 10:2010. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm1009201010.3390/jcm10092010 ↗
19. Bozkur Y, Karayel E (2021) 3D printing technology; methods, biomedical applications, future opportunities and trends. J Market Res 14:1430–1450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2021.07.05010.1016/j.jmrt.2021.07.050 ↗
20. Haleem A, Javaid M, Hasan Khan R, Suman R (2020) 3D printing applications in bone tissue engineering. J Clin Orthopaed Trauma 1(1):S118–S124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2019.12.00210.1016/j.jcot.2019.12.002 ↗
21. Genova T, Roato I, Carossa M, Motta C, Cavagnetto D, Mussano F (2020) Advances on bone substitutes through 3D bioprinting. Int J Mol Sci 21:7012. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms2119701210.3390/ijms21197012 ↗
22. Duarte Campos DF, Philip MA, Gurzing S, Melcher C, Ying Lin Y, Schoneberg J, Blaeser A, Theek B, Fischer H, Betsch M (2019) Synchronized dual bioprinting of bioinks and biomaterial inks as a translational strategy for cartilage tissue engineering. 3D Print Addit Manuf 6(2):63–7110.1089/3dp.2018.0123 ↗
23. Fernandes MG, Alves JL, Fonseca EMM (2016) Diaphyseal femoral fracture: 3D biomodel and intramedullary nail created by additive manufacturing. Int J Mater Eng Innov. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMATEI.2016.07955610.1504/IJMATEI.2016.079556 ↗
24. Revilla M, Meyers MJ, Zandinejad A, Ozcan M (2019) A review on chemical composition, mechanical properties, and manufacturing work flow of additively manufactured current polymers for interim dental restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 31:51–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.1243810.1111/jerd.12438 ↗
25. Azari A, Nikzad S (2009) The evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review. Rapid Prototyp J 15:216–225. https://doi.org/10.1108/1355254091096194610.1108/13552540910961946 ↗
26. Horn TJ, Harrysson O (2012) Overview of current additive manufacturing technologies and selected applications. Sci Prog 95:255–282. https://doi.org/10.3184/003685012X1342098446304710.3184/003685012X13420984463047 ↗
27. Gardan J (2016) Additive manufacturing technologies: state of the art and trends. Int J Prod Res 54(10):3118–3132. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.111590910.1080/00207543.2015.1115909 ↗
28. Jiménez M, Romero L, Domínguez IA, Espinosa MM, Domínguez M (2019) Additive manufacturing technologies: an overview about 3D printing methods and future prospects. Complexity. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/965693810.1155/2019/9656938 ↗
29. Revilla-León M, Özcan M (2019) Additive manufacturing technologies used for processing polymers: current status and potential application in prosthetic dentistry. J Prosthodont 28:146–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.1280110.1111/jopr.12801 ↗
30. Cole D, Bencharit S, Carrico CK, Arias A, Tüfekçi E (2019) Evaluation of fit for 3D-printed retainers compared with thermoform retainers. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 155:592–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.09.01110.1016/j.ajodo.2018.09.011 ↗
31. Skaik A, Wei XL, Abusamak I, Iddi I (2019) Effects of time and clear aligner removal frequency on the force delivered by different polyethylene terephthalate glycol-modified materials determined with thin-film pressure sensors. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 155:98–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.03.01710.1016/j.ajodo.2018.03.017 ↗
32. Iijima M, Kohda N, Kawaguchi K, Muguruma T, Mitsuru O, Naganishi A et al (2015) Effects of temperature changes and stress loading on the mechanical and shape memory properties of thermoplastic materials with different glass transition behaviours and crystal structures. Eur J Orthod 37:665–670. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjv01310.1093/ejo/cjv013 ↗
33. Fang D, Zhang N, Chen H, Ba Y (2017) Dynamic stress relaxation of orthodontic thermoplastic materials in a simulated oral environment. Dent Mater J 32:946–951. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2013-13110.4012/dmj.2013-131 ↗
34. Lombardo L, Martines E, Mazzanti V, Arreghini A, Mollica F (2016) Stress relaxation properties of four orthodontic aligner materials: a 24-h in vitro study. Angle Orthod 87:11–18. https://doi.org/10.2319/113015-813.110.2319/113015-813.1 ↗
35. Ledingham AD, English JD, Akyalcin S, Cozad BE, Ontiveros JC, Kasper FK (2016) Accuracy and mechanical properties of orthodontic models printed 3-dimensionally from calcium sulfate before and after various postprinting treatments. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 150:1056–1062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.04.02710.1016/j.ajodo.2016.04.027 ↗
36. Favero CS, English JD, Cozad BE, Wirthlin JO, Short MM, Kasper FK (2017) Effect of print layer height and printer type on the accuracy of 3-dimensional printed orthodontic models. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 15:557–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.06.01210.1016/j.ajodo.2017.06.012 ↗
37. Kim S, Shin Y, Jung H, Hwang C, Baik H, Cha J (2018) Precision and trueness of dental models manufactured with different 3-dimensional printing techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 153:144–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.05.02510.1016/j.ajodo.2017.05.025 ↗
38. Ji SS, Jong-Eun K, Sang HJ, Yeon JC, Jae JR (2020) Printing accuracy, mechanical properties, surfacecharacteristics, and microbial adhesion of 3D-printed resinswith various printing orientations. J Prosthet Dent 124:468–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.03410.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.034 ↗
39. Alhardi N, Osman R, Wismeijer D (2016) Effects of build direction on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed complete coverage interim dental restorations. J Prosthet Dent 115:760–767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.00210.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.002 ↗
40. Lin CH, Lin YM, Lai YL, Lee SY (2020) Mechanical properties, accuracy, and cytotoxicity of UV-polymerized 3D printing resins composed of Bis-EMA, UDMA, and TEGDMA. J Prosthet Dent 123:349–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.00210.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.002 ↗
41. International Organization for Standardization (2018) Biological evaluation of medical devices–part 1: evaluation and testing within a risk management process (ISO Standard No. 10993–1:2018).
42. American Society for Testing and Materials (2014) Standard test method for tensile properties of plastics (ASTM D638-14).
43. International Organization for Standardization (2018) Plastics—determination of flexural properties (ISO Standard No. 178:2018).
44. American Society for Testing and Materials (2017) Standard test methods for flexural properties of unreinforced and reinforced plastics and electrical insulating materials (ASTM D790–17).