Comparison and Evaluation of Fracture Toughness of Milled, 3D-Printed, and Conventional Polymethyl Methacrylate: An In Vitro Study

Prashanti Adsare; Amit Patil; Pooja Raj; Shivakumar Puranik; Rajesh Menga; Koineni Rajendra

doi:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_819_23

Comparison and Evaluation of Fracture Toughness of Milled, 3D-Printed, and Conventional Polymethyl Methacrylate: An In Vitro Study

J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Feb;16(Suppl 1):S484-S487. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_819_23. Epub 2024 Feb 1.

Authors

Prashanti Adsare¹, Amit Patil¹, Pooja Raj¹, Shivakumar Puranik¹, Rajesh Menga¹, Koineni Rajendra¹

Affiliation

¹ Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology, H.K.E.S' S. Nijalingappa's Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Kalaburagi, Karnataka, India.

Abstract

Introduction: Dentures aim to replicate natural dentition's esthetics and functions as much as possible. With computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology, dentistry had a new renaissance with workflow and materials.

Aim: The aim is to compare the fracture toughness of the milled, 3D-printed, and conventional polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) to those processed conventionally.

Materials and methods: 10 CAD MILLED PMMA BLOCKS, 10 3D PRINTED PMMA BLOCKS, and 10 CONVENTIONAL (HEAT CURE) PMMA BLOCKS.

Results: A significant difference was seen in the mean flexural module when compared among three study groups as P < 0.05. It was found to be maximum in CAD/CAM PMMA, followed by conventional heat cure and 3D-printed PMMA.

Conclusion: Formlabs and Dentca (3D-printed) were significantly weaker in fracture toughness compared to Leucitone 199 (conventional) (P < 0.05). Leucitone 199 (conventional) was significantly weaker in fracture toughness compared to Avadent (CAD CAM) (P < 0.05).

Keywords: 3D printed; conventional PMMA; fracture toughness; milled.