ArticlePloS one2025
Fracture toughness of three-dimensional printed and milled denture bases.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Denture base fractures are a common issue, particularly in overdentures, necessitating high fracture toughness in denture base polymers to withstand oral mechanical loads. Despite the importance of fracture resistance, current denture base materials often fall short of meeting the required standards. The literature shows conflicting results regarding the fracture toughness of three-dimensional (3D)-printed materials compared to conventional and milled options. This study aimed to address this gap by evaluating the fracture toughness of commercially available digital denture base resins, including two CAD/CAM-milled and two 3D-printed materials. Using a three-point bending test on notched beams according to ISO 20795-1:2013 standards, the study compared the fracture toughness of FormLabs denture base LP, NextDent Denture 3D, AvaDent, and XANTECH PMMA. Results revealed that NextDent exhibited the highest fracture toughness, suggesting better crack propagation resistance. Printed acrylic (NextDent) and prepolymerized polymethyl methacrylate (AvaDent and XANTECH) demonstrated superior fracture toughness compared to Formlabs photopolymerized diurethane methacrylate. However, none of the tested materials met the ISO's highest impact resistance requirements. These findings highlight the variability in fracture toughness among different manufacturing techniques and compositions, emphasizing the need for further research to develop denture base materials with enhanced impact resistance. This study provides valuable insights for clinicians in material selection for denture fabrication and underscores the importance of continued innovation in dental materials to improve the longevity and performance of prosthetic devices.
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.