ArticleBMC oral health2025
Effects of additive manufacturing technology and build angle on surface characteristics and microbial adhesion of 3D-printed dental zirconia: a laboratory study.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Effects of Ultrasonic Scaling and Teeth Brushing on Surface Properties of PEEK Prosthetic Restorations.Dentistry journal · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMicrobial colonization on 3D-printed zirconia restorations may aggravate plaque accumulation and periodontal inflammation. While additive manufacturing (AM) parameters significantly influence surface roughness and morphology, evidence regarding their impact on bacterial adhesion remains unclear. This study investigated the effects of AM technologies and build angles on the surface characteristics and initial microbial adhesion of 3D-printed zirconia.
methodsZirconia discs were fabricated using material jetting (MJ, 10 μm layer thickness) and digital light processing (DLP, 30 μm layer thickness) technologies with three build angles (0°, 45°, and 90°), respectively (n = 25 per group). The surface topographic features and roughness were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy and laser scanning microscopy, respectively. The surface wettability was evaluated via water contact angle measurements. Streptococcus gordonii (S. gordonii) was used to assess bacterial adhesion, which was evaluated via colony-forming unit counts and visualized through SEM imaging. Statistical analysis involved two-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests, with significance threshold set at p < 0.05.
resultsAM technologies and build angle significantly affected surface characteristics, with significant interactions observed for roughness (p < 0.05). DLP-45° showed the roughest surface, while DLP-0° was the smoothest. Water contact angle varied significantly with both factors (p < 0.05), with MJ-45° showing the highest wettability. For S. gordonii adhesion, a significant interaction between AM methods and build angle was found (p < 0.05), and AM methods showed a main effect (p = 0.0104), while build angle alone was not significant (p = 0.0642). The least adhesion occurred in MJ-45° and DLP-0°, with no consistent correlation between roughness and bacterial adhesion.
conclusionsAM technologies and build angle affected S. gordonii adhesion to zirconia surfaces. DLP printing at 0° and MJ printing at 45° were associated with significantly reduced bacterial counts, presenting a clinically approach to minimize initial plaque formation and support the long-term periodontal success of 3D-printed zirconia 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.