ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2025
Evaluation of the bond strength, surface roughness and wettability between 3D-printed denture base resin to denture lining material to different surface treatments.
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The low bond strength between 3D-printed denture base resin and denture lining material is due to the difference in chemical structure, which justifies the use of methods to increase such bond. This study aims to examine the influence of different surface treatments on the bond strength, surface roughness, and wettability between 3D-printed denture resin and denture lining material. Material and Methods: Bar-shaped (75×10×10 mm) and square-shaped (10×10×3 mm) specimens were manufactured using heat-polymerized (HT) (VIPICRIL Plus) and 3D-printed (3D) (Prizma 3D Bio Denture) denture base resin. The bar specimens were sectioned, removing 3 mm from the center to facilitate the insertion of the denture lining material (Ufi Gel SC). Specimens were subjected to three surface treatments (n=15): no treatment (CT), immersion in monomer for 180 seconds (M), and airborne-particle abrasion oxide with 50 µm aluminum oxide (AP). The tensile bond strength was measured at a rate of 5mm/min before and after subjecting the specimens to thermocycling (10 000 cycles). The square-shaped specimens were used to assess average surface roughness (Ra) and wettability (°). Data analysis was performed using a 3-way ANOVA with Tukey's post-test ( Results: The treatment of the 3D-printed denture base resin (1.200±0.486) with AP made the bond strength to the denture lining material similar to HT denture base resin (1.314±0.249), without the negative impact of aging. In contrast, M treatment increased the bond strength of both resins to the denture lining material (HT: 2.076±0.463; 3D: 1.534±0.484). Treatment with M provided a lower contact angle for the 3D and HT denture base resin, while the HT denture base resin presented a greater surface roughness for M and AP, compared to 3D. Conclusions: The 3D-printed denture base resin should undergo immersion in monomer treatment to enhance its bond strength with the denture lining material.
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.