ArticleThe journal of advanced prosthodontics2025
Deformation analysis of 3D-printed three-unit fixed partial dentures according to various cleaning strategies after DLP 3D printing: a geometric library matching approach.
Article in The journal of advanced prosthodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThree-dimensional (3D) printing must go through a post-processing procedure. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different cleaning methods on 3D printed three-unit fixed partial dentures using 3D analysis. MATERIALS AND
methodsA three-unit fixed partial denture was designed and printed using two different printers. The evaluation was taken regarding cleaning method with ethanol (ETH) or isopropanol (IPA), and combining ultrasonic (US) technique for the following groups: group 1, ETH; group 2, ETH+US; group 3, IPA; group 4, IPA+US; and group 5, US. The 3D evaluation was conducted by calculating the mean distance between two specific points and analyzing various angular deviations, utilizing the geometry-embedded library. In addition, visual analysis was performed by creating sectional planes in different points of view. Normality test and independent t-test were performed to compare results between the two printers used in this study. In addition, one-way ANOVA was performed to compare cleaning method groups.
resultsMean distance results showed statistical differences between printers for groups IPA, US, and IPA+US, whereas no significant differences were found among cleaning methods. Angular measurements were taken at the bucco-lingual, proximal, and occlusal planes to assess deviations in the internal surfaces. Overall results showed a tendency of shrinkage of the printed three-unit fixed partial denture.
conclusionUltrasonic treatment may impact the washing efficiency when used with other cleaning solutions regarding angular and longitudinal deformation. Adequate selection of post-processing methods is crucial to decrease morphological deformities in 3D printed materials.
Indexed as
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.