Publication:
Evaluation of the Flexural and Repair Bond Strengths of 3D-Printed Temporary Restorations

dc.authorscopusid60122394400
dc.authorscopusid8856334100
dc.authorscopusid59377851700
dc.authorscopusid36552323600
dc.contributor.authorDincer, Nazmi
dc.contributor.authorKulunk, Safak
dc.contributor.authorKisakurek, Seniha
dc.contributor.authorDuran, Ibrahim
dc.date.accessioned2025-12-11T00:34:21Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.departmentOndokuz Mayıs Üniversitesien_US
dc.department-temp[Dincer, Nazmi] Medisam Oral & Dent Hlth Polyclin, Dent Sci, Samsun, Turkiye; [Kulunk, Safak] Ondokuz Mayis Univ, Sch Dent, Dept Prosthodont, Samsun, Turkiye; [Kisakurek, Seniha] Mugla Sitki Kocman Univ, Sch Dent, Dept Prosthodont, Mugla, Turkiye; [Duran, Ibrahim] Avrasya Univ, Dept Dent Prosthesis Technol, Trabzon, Turkiyeen_US
dc.description.abstractBackground The aim of this study was to evaluate the early bending strength of 3D-printed temporary restorations and the repair bond strength after different surface treatments.<br /> Methods Fifty samples of 25 mm x 2 mm x 2 mm in size were produced from methylmethacrylate-free photopolymer resin temporary material (GC TempPrint, GC, Japan) with a 3D printer (NextDent, 3D Systems, Netherlands). The samples were cleaned, polymerized, finished, and stored at 37 degrees C with 100% humidity for 24 h before testing.The initial flexural strength was evaluated via a 3-point bending test on a universal testing machine (AG-IS, Shimadzu, Japan).The broken samples were randomly divided into 5 groups for different surface treatments. In the control group, no surface treatment was applied to the fracture surfaces (Group C). In the other groups, sandblasting (Group G), sandblasting with a silane-containing agent (GS), sandblasting with 50 mu m Al2O3 particles (S), sandblasting with 50 mu m Al2O3 particles and a silane-containing agent (SS) were applied to the samples. The fractured surfaces were repaired with a high-filling flowable composite (G-Aenial Universal Flo, GC, Japan) and polymerized with an LED light device for 20 s.The bond strength was evaluated via a 3-point fracture test on a universal testing device. The data obtained were examined with one-way ANOVA and a paired sample t-test. The surface treatments applied to the fractured surfaces were examined via stereomicroscopy (Olympus microscope BX50, Japan).<br /> Results There was no significant difference in early-stage fracture strength among the groups (P > 0.05).There was a statistically significant difference in the repair bond strengths (P<0.05).The highest repair bond strength was obtained in Group SS, and the lowest was obtained in Group C. Conclusions Silane-containing agent application after sandblasting with Al2O3 was found to be the most effective method for repairing 3D-printed photopolymer resin temporary materials without methyl methacrylate.en_US
dc.description.woscitationindexScience Citation Index Expanded
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12903-025-06919-x
dc.identifier.issn1472-6831
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.pmid41023999
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105017748661
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-06919-x
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12712/37559
dc.identifier.volume25en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001586148300012
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBMCen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBMC Oral Healthen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectTemporary Restorationsen_US
dc.subjectAdditive Manufacturingen_US
dc.subjectRepair Strengthen_US
dc.subject3D Printingen_US
dc.subjectResinen_US
dc.titleEvaluation of the Flexural and Repair Bond Strengths of 3D-Printed Temporary Restorationsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files