ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2024
Evaluation of the Influence of Build Orientation on the Surface Roughness and Flexural Strength of 3D-Printed Denture Base Resin and Its Comparison with CAD-CAM Milled Denture Base Resin.
Article in European journal of dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- CAD-CAM vs. conventional denture bases: a systematic review with network meta-analysis ofFrontiers in dental medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Influence of ZnO Nanoparticles on the Color and Surface Roughness of Composite and Glass-Ionomer Materials.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Mechanical Anisotropy and Fatigue Behavior of 3D-Printed Dentures: A Comparison with CAD/CAM Milled Bases After Thermomechanical Aging.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Influence of various disinfection methods on the flexural strength of additively manufactured denture base resins: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Mechanical and optical effects of post-curing time and device type in two 3D-printed resin systems.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Systematic review and meta analysis of mechanical properties of 3D printed denture bases compared to milled and conventional materials.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Influence of Printing Orientation on the Properties of 3D-Printed Polymeric Provisional Dental Restorations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
- Evaluation of mechanical properties and color stability of 3D-printed denture base materials following two surface treatments.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Effects of post-polymerization conditions on color properties, surface roughness, and flexural strength of 3D-printed permanent resin material after thermal aging.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2025Article
- Analysis of Mechanical Properties and Printing Orientation Influence of Composite Resin for 3D Printing Compared to Conventional Resin.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- In Vitro Evaluation of Candida albicans Adhesion and Related Surface Properties of CAD/CAM Denture Base Resins.European journal of dentistry · 2024Article
- The Influence of Contemporary Denture Base Fabrication Methods on Residual Monomer Content, Flexural Strength and Microhardness.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe purpose of this study was to determine the surface roughness and flexural strength of a three-dimensional (3D)-printed denture base resin printed with two different build plate orientations and to compare them with a computer-aided design-computer-aided manufacture (CAD-CAM) milled denture base resin. MATERIALS AND
methodsSixty-six specimens ( STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data were analyzed by a statistical software package. One-way analysis of variance test was applied to determine whether significant differences existed among the study groups, followed by Bonferroni post-hoc test to determine which resin group significantly differed from the others in terms of flexural strength and surface roughness (
resultsThe flexural stress (MPa) of group C was 200% of group A and 166% of group B. The flexural modulus was 192% of group A and 161% of group B. In contrast, group A had the lowest mean value among the three groups for all the parameters. No significant difference was seen between group A and group B. The mean roughness values of the CAD-CAM denture base resin specimens (group C) were the least (127356 nm) among all the three groups. The mean surface roughness of the 3D-printed denture base specimens (group A) was 1,34,234 nm and that of group B was (1,45,931 nm); however, it was statistically nonsignificant (
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.