ArticleBMC oral health2025
Surface gloss changes in 3D-printed resin materials following different polishing procedures and aging protocols.
Article in BMC oral health, 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.
- Toothbrush Resistance of Resin-Based Stain and Glaze Materials Applied to 3D-Printed Denture Resins.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundsThe aim of this study was to compare the gloss values obtained from two different 3D-printed resins and one composite resin following the application of various polishing techniques, and to evaluate their gloss retention after exposure to different aging protocols.
methodsTwo 3D-printed resins, Varseo Smile Crown (BEGO, Germany) and Saremco Print Crowntec (Saremco Dental, Switzerland) and one composite resin (G-aenial Universal Posterior, A2, GC, Japan) were tested. A total of 280 specimens were fabricated and subjected to four different polishing protocols (Enhance + Twist Dia, Enhance + Polishing paste, Enhance + Twist Dia + Polishing paste, and glazing). An additional group received no polishing and served as the control. Gloss values were measured using a glossmeter (NovoGloss; Rhopoint Instrument, UK) at three time points: after fabrication (T0), after polishing (T1), and after 1- hour aging (T2). After the first measurement, the specimens were subjected to three aging procedures: toothbrushing simulation, exposure to acidic fluoride gel (Elmex Gelée, GABA, Switzerland), and immersion in alcohol (75% ethanol). Distilled water served as the control group. Data were statistically analyzed using paired t-tests, one-way ANOVA, and Tamhane's T2 post hoc tests, with significance set at p < 0.05.
resultsInitial gloss values of both 3D-printed resins were comparable, with glazing achieving the highest gloss. Regardless of the polishing technique, the composite resin exhibited the highest gloss values, with the Enhance + Polishing paste method yielding the best results. Among all aging procedures, toothbrushing mechanical aging resulted in the most significant gloss reduction for all three materials.
conclusionFor the composite resin, the Enhance + Polishing paste technique provided the highest gloss. For the 3D-printed resins, glazing was the most effective method in achieving higher gloss. Mechanical aging had the greatest detrimental effect on gloss for all tested 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.