Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37050388›Full record

ArticlePolymers2023

Mechanical Properties, Fractal Dimension, and Texture Analysis of Selected 3D-Printed Resins Used in Dentistry That Underwent the Compression Test.

Anna Paradowska-Stolarz, Mieszko Wieckiewicz, Marcin Kozakiewicz, Kamil Jurczyszyn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polymers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. International journal of dentistry · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The Influence of Polishing and Artificial Aging on BioMed AmberJournal of functional biomaterials · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anna Paradowska-StolarzDivision of Dentofacial Anomalies, Department of Maxillofacial Orthopedics and Orthodontics, Wroclaw Medical University, Krakowska 26, 50-425 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2817-1445
Mieszko WieckiewiczDepartment of Experimental Dentistry, Wroclaw Medical University, 50-425 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-4953-7143
Marcin KozakiewiczDepartment of Maxillofacial Surgery, Medical University of Lodz, 90-647 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-9200-2828
Kamil JurczyszynDepartment of Dental Surgery, Wroclaw Medical University, 50-425 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-0667-7261
Wroclaw Medical University · PLMedical University of Lodz · PL

Funding

Wroclaw Medical University SUBK.B032.22.023
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Three-dimensional printing is finding increasing applications in today's world. Due to the accuracy and the possibility of rapid production, the CAD/CAM (computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing) technology has become the most desired approach in the preparation of elements, especially in medicine and dentistry. This study aimed to compare the biomechanical properties, fractal dimension (FD), and texture of three selected materials used for 3D printing in dentistry. Three biomaterials used in 3D printing were evaluated. The materials were subjected to the compression test. Then, their mechanical features, FD, and texture were analyzed. All the tested materials showed different values for the studied properties. The only statistically insignificant difference was observed for the force used in the compression test. All three materials showed differences in width and height measurements. The difference in the decrease between the compression plates was also significant. For Dental LT Clear, the mean value was 0.098 mm (SD = 0.010), while for BioMed Amber it was 0.059 mm (SD = 0.019), and for IBT it was 0.356 mm (SD = 0.015). The nominal strain also differed between the materials. IBT had the highest mean value (7.98), while BioMed Amber had the smallest (1.31). FD analysis revealed that Dental LT Clear did not show differences in the structure of the material. The other two materials showed significant changes after the compression test. Texture analysis (TA) revealed similar results: BioMed Amber resin showed significantly less pronounced texture changes compared to the other two materials. BioMed Amber also showed the most stable mechanical properties, whereas those of IBT changed the most. Fractal analysis revealed that IBT showed significant differences from the other two materials, whereas TA showed that only Dental LT Clear did not show changes in its texture after the compression test. Before the compression, however, BioMed Amber differed the most when bone index was taken into account.

Indexed as

3D printbiomaterialbone indexcompression testdentistryfractal dimensionresintexture

Identifiers

PMID37050388
PMCPMC10098904
OpenAlexW4362584914

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.