Comparison of the Fracture Resistance of Provisional Crowns and Fixed Partial Dentures Manufactured with Conventional, Milling, and 3D-Printing Techniques
Source abstract
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different manufacturing techniques and thermal aging on the fracture resistance of provisional crowns and fixed partial dentures. Methods: A total of 60 provisional crowns and 60 provisional fixed partial dentures were fabricated using three manufacturing techniques: conventional manufacturing (CM), subtractive manufacturing (SM), and additive manufacturing (AM). An index created from SM-manufactured restorations was used to produce the CM group. Artificial abutments were created by duplicating scanned phantom teeth using model resin. Half of the restorations (n = 10 per group) were subjected to thermal aging (5–55 °C, 5000 cycles). The fracture resistance values of the specimens were tested using a universal testing machine. Data were analyzed using a two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc tests (α = 0.05). The highest mean fracture resistance was observed in the SM group without aging, both for crowns (1645.4 ± 346.8 N) and fixed partial dentures (1291.13 ± 564.15 N). The two-way ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences among the groups, and thermal aging significantly reduced the fracture resistance (p < 0.05). Both the manufacturing method and thermal aging significantly influenced the fracture resistance of provisional crowns and fixed partial dentures. In fixed partial dentures, a significant effect of aging was associated with the reduced durability of restorations fabricated using the subtractive manufacturing method.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Dental Research and COVID-19 · Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University, 06490 Ankara, Türkiye
Funding
Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit of Gazi University
References (47)
Show source-provided references
1. Alkhateeb, R.I., Algaoud, H.S., Aldamanhori, R.B., Alshubaili, R.R., Alalawi, H., and Gad, M.M. (2023). Fracture load of 3D-printed interim three-unit fixed dental prostheses: Impact of printing orientation and post-curing time. Polymers, 15.10.3390/polym15071737 ↗
2. Comparison of fracture strength after thermo-mechanical aging between provisional crowns made with CAD/CAM and conventional method10.4047/jap.2020.12.4.218 ↗
3. Abad-Coronel, C., Carrera, E., Mena Córdova, N., Fajardo, J.I., and Aliaga, P. (2021). Comparative analysis of fracture resistance between CAD/CAM materials for interim fixed prosthesis. Materials, 14.10.3390/ma14247791 ↗
4. Jain, S., Sayed, M.E., Shetty, M., Alqahtani, S.M., Al Wadei, M.H.D., Gupta, S.G., Othman, A.A.A., Alshehri, A.H., Alqarni, H., and Mobarki, A.H. (2022). Physical and mechanical properties of 3D-printed provisional crowns and fixed dental prosthesis resins compared to CAD/CAM milled and conventional provisional resins: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Polymers, 14.10.3390/polym14132691 ↗
5. Comparison of the flexural strength and marginal accuracy of traditional and CAD/CAM interim materials before and after thermal cycling10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.01.012 ↗
6. Fracture strength of interim CAD/CAM and conventional partial fixed dental prostheses10.1111/jopr.13325 ↗
7. Henderson, J.Y., Korioth, T.V.P., Tantbirojn, D., and Versluis, A. (2022). Failure load of milled, 3D-printed, and conventional chairside-dispensed interim 3-unit fixed dental prostheses. J. Prosthet. Dent., 127.10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.11.005 ↗
8. In vitro fatigue and fracture testing of temporary materials from different manufacturing processes in implant-supported anterior crowns10.1007/s00784-023-05038-7 ↗
9. Materials in digital dentistry: A review10.1111/jerd.12566 ↗
10. Effect of fabrication method on fracture strength of provisional implant supported fixed dental prostheses10.3390/prosthesis2040030 ↗
11. A review of 3D printing in dentistry: Technologies, affecting factors, and applications10.1155/2021/9950131 ↗
12. Kaiahara, F.H., Pizi, E.C.G., Straioto, F.G., Galvani, L.D., Kuga, M.C., Arrué, T.A., Junior, A.R., Só, M.V.R., Pereira, J.R., and Vidotti, H. (2025). Influence of Printing Orientation on the Mechanical Properties of Provisional Polymeric Materials Produced by 3D Printing. Polymers, 17.10.3390/polym17030265 ↗
13. Park, S.M., Park, J.M., Kim, S.K., Heo, S.J., and Koak, J.Y. (2020). Flexural strength of 3D-printing resin materials for provisional fixed dental prostheses. Materials, 13.10.3390/ma13183970 ↗
14. Taşın, S., and Ismatullaev, A. (2022). Comparative evaluation of the effect of thermocycling on the mechanical properties of conventionally polymerized, CAD-CAM milled, and 3D-printed interim materials. J. Prosthet. Dent., 127.10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.09.020 ↗
15. Marginal and Internal Gaps, Surface Roughness and Fracture Resistance of Provisional Crowns Fabricated with 3D Printing and Milling Systems10.2341/22-095-L ↗
16. Properties and behavior of additively manufactured provisional fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review on 3D printing orientations relative to applied materials and postprocessing10.1111/jerd.13435 ↗
17. Evaluation of the flexural strength and microhardness of provisional crown and bridge materials fabricated by different methods10.4103/0972-4052.191288 ↗
18. Pantea, M., Ciocoiu, R.C., Greabu, M., Ripszky Totan, A., Imre, M., Țâncu, A.M.C., Sfeatcu, R., Spînu, T.C., Ilinca, R., and Petre, A.E. (2022). Compressive and flexural strength of 3D-printed and conventional resins designated for interim fixed dental prostheses: An in vitro comparison. Materials, 15.10.3390/ma15093075 ↗
19. Fracture resistance of interim restoration constructed by 3D printing versus CAD/CAM technique (In vitro study)
20. Evaluation of the effects of finish line type and width on the fracture strength of provisional crowns10.1007/s10266-020-00533-9 ↗
21. Fracture resistance of additive manufactured and milled implant-supported interim crowns10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.11.017 ↗
22. Othman, A., Sandmair, M., Alevizakos, V., and von See, C. (2023). The fracture resistance of 3D-printed versus milled provisional crowns: An in vitro study. PLoS ONE, 18.10.1371/journal.pone.0285760 ↗
23. In-vitro performance of subtractively and additively manufactured resin-based molar crowns10.1016/j.jmbbm.2023.105806 ↗
24. Elsareef, S.S., Azer, A.S., and Morsy, N. (2024). Evaluation of fracture resistance and marginal fit of implant-supported interim crowns fabricated by conventional, additive and subtractive methods. BMC Oral Health, 24.10.1186/s12903-024-04597-9 ↗
25. Comparison of fracture strength, surface hardness, and color stain of conventionally fabricated, 3D printed, and CAD-CAM milled interim prosthodontic materials after thermocycling10.4047/jap.2024.16.2.115 ↗
26. Examination of the effect of aging process on marginal fit and fracture strength of temporary crowns prepared from different materials10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26737 ↗
27. Fracture load of 3D-printed fixed dental prostheses compared with milled and conventionally fabricated ones: The impact of resin material, build direction, post-curing, and artificial aging—An in vitro study10.1007/s00784-019-02952-7 ↗
28. Nold, J., Wesemann, C., Rieg, L., Binder, L., Witkowski, S., Spies, B.C., and Kohal, R.J. (2021). Does printing orientation matter? In-vitro fracture strength of temporary fixed dental prostheses after a 1-year simulation in the artificial mouth. Materials, 14.10.3390/ma14020259 ↗
29. Comparison of fracture resistance of three-unit provisional fixed dental prostheses fabricated using conventional and digital methods
30. Mechanical properties of 3D printed prosthetic materials compared with milled and conventional processing: A systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.06.008 ↗
31. Abad-Coronel, C., Durán Urdiales, D., Benalcázar Arias, M.V., Córdova, A.K., Medina, M.S., and Bravo Torres, W. (2025). Flexural strength, fatigue behavior, and microhardness of three-dimensional (3D)-printed resin material for indirect restorations: A systematic review. Materials, 18.10.3390/ma18030556 ↗
32. Comparison of interim restorations fabricated by CAD/CAM with those fabricated manually10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.03.007 ↗
33. In vitro study of fracture strength of provisional crown materials10.4047/jap.2015.7.1.27 ↗
34. Comparison of flexural strength of different CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymers10.1111/jopr.12755 ↗
35. Ellakany, P., Fouda, S.M., Mahrous, A.A., AlGhamdi, M.A., and Aly, N.M. (2022). Influence of CAD/CAM milling and 3D-printing fabrication methods on the mechanical properties of 3-unit interim fixed dental prosthesis after thermo-mechanical aging process. Polymers, 14.10.3390/polym14194103 ↗
36. Influence of cleaning methods after 3D printing on two-body wear and fracture load of resin-based temporary crown and bridge material10.1007/s00784-021-03905-9 ↗
37. Alzahrani, S.J., Hajjaj, M.S., Azhari, A.A., Ahmed, W.M., Yeslam, H.E., and Carvalho, R.M. (2023). Mechanical properties of three-dimensional printed provisional resin materials for crown and fixed dental prosthesis: A systematic review. Bioengineering, 10.10.3390/bioengineering10060663 ↗
38. In vitro investigation of the influence of printing direction on the flexural strength, flexural modulus and fractographic analysis of 3D-printed temporary materials10.4012/dmj.2020-147 ↗
39. Effect of printing orientation on the fracture strength of additively manufactured 3-unit interim fixed dental prostheses after aging10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104155 ↗
40. Effect of printing orientation and postcuring time on the flexural strength of 3D-printed resins10.1111/jopr.13572 ↗
41. Effect of build orientation on mechanical and physical properties of additively manufactured resins using digital light processing technology in dentistry: A systematic review
42. Effect of thermo-mechanical cycling on fracture resistance of different CAD/CAM crowns: An in vitro study10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3619 ↗
43. 3D printed versus conventionally cured provisional crown and bridge dental materials10.1016/j.dental.2017.10.003 ↗
44. Mechanical properties of additively manufactured and milled interim 3-unit fixed dental prostheses10.1111/jopr.13524 ↗
45. Sabbah, A., Romanos, G., and Delgado-Ruiz, R. (2021). Impact of layer thickness and storage time on the properties of 3D-printed dental dies. Materials, 14.10.3390/ma14030509 ↗
46. Aktaş, N., Akın, Y., Ocak, M., Atabek, D., and Bankoğlu Güngör, M. (2025). Marginal and internal adaptation and absolute marginal discrepancy of 3D-printed, milled, and prefabricated crowns for primary molar teeth: An in vitro comparative study. BMC Oral Health, 25.10.1186/s12903-025-05947-x ↗
47. The effects of additive manufacturing technologies and finish line designs on the trueness and dimensional stability of 3D-printed dies10.1111/jopr.13588 ↗