ArticleBiomaterial investigations in dentistry2025
Characterization of temporary and permanent 3D-printed crown and bridge resins.
Article in Biomaterial investigations in dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanical Performance of 3D-Printed Resin Materials for Endocrown Restorations: A Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance, Weibull Analysis, and Experimental Fracture Toughness.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Do the Pre-Existing Class III and Class V Composite Restorations Affect the Sealing Ability and Integrity of 3D-Printed Laminate Veneer Margins? An In Vitro Study.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Hydrolytic stability and surface roughness of additively and subtractively manufactured CAD/CAM and indirect restorative resin materials.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Effect of Different Luting Protocols on the Bond Strength of Fiber-Reinforced CAD/CAM Blocks.Polymers · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the mechanical, surface, and optical properties of two 3D-printed crown and bridge resins (CROWNTEC and Temp PRINT). Additionally, the study assessed the effects of printing orientation and accelerated hydrothermal aging on their mechanical properties. Materials and methods: Specimens were 3D-printed using digital light processing technology (Asiga MAX™). Mechanical properties, including flexural strength (FS), compressive strength, and fracture toughness (FT), were determined for each material following ISO standards. Three printing orientations (0°, 45°, and 90°) were used for fabricating 3-point bending specimens. Surface hardness was evaluated using a Vickers indenter. Two-body wear tests were conducted using a ball-on-flat configuration in a chewing simulator with 15,000 cycles, and wear depth was measured with a non-contact 3D optical profilometer. Disk-shaped specimens ( Results: Hydrothermal aging, printing orientation, and material type significantly affected the FS values ( Conclusion: Temp PRINT demonstrated superior mechanical performance compared to CROWNTEC, which exhibited higher translucency values. The printing orientation was identified as a critical parameter influencing the mechanical properties and overall performance of 3D printed restorations.
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.