Journal of Technologic Dentistry 2024; 46(1): 8-14
Published online March 30, 2024
https://doi.org/10.14347/jtd.2024.46.1.8
© Korean Academy of Dental Technology
김동연1, 이광영2
1경동대학교 치기공학과, 2원광보건대학교 치기공과
Dong-Yeon Kim1 , Gwang-Young Lee2
1Department of Dental Technology, Kyungdong University, Wonju, Korea
2Department of Dental Laboratory Technology, Wonkwang Health Science University, Iksan, Korea
Correspondence to :
Gwang-Young Lee
Department of Dental Laboratory Technology, Wonkwang Health Science University, 514 Iksan-daero, Iksan 54538, Korea
E-mail: leegy@wu.ac.kr
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1826-6870
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Purpose: This study compares the deformation of traditional resin dentures to resin dentures printed with digital light processing (DLP).
Methods: Eleven edentulous research models were developed. Ten of them were made with traditional resin dentures. The remaining one was prepared for scanning and 3D (three-dimensional) printing. Ten traditional resin dentures were made, with the remaining artificial teeth created using 3D software and a DLP printer. Traditional resin dentures, 3D-printed resin denture artificial teeth, and a denture base with artificial teeth were all cleaned simultaneously in an ultrasonic cleaner for 3 minutes. Three groups were assigned four artificial tooth measurement points, which were then measured with digital calipers. The measured data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The significance test was conducted using a nonparametric test Kruskal-Wallis test due to the small number of specimens (α=0.05).
Results: The traditional resin dentures had the lowest strain rate at –0.04%, while the group that manufactured only artificial teeth had the highest strain rate at –0.09%. However, no statistically significant difference was observed between the 3 groups (p>0.05).
Conclusion: During ultraviolet-type ultrasonic cleaning, traditional resin dentures (TD group) and denture base with artificial teeth made of DLP (DD group) demonstrated stable durability, whereas the artificial teeth made of DLP (AD group) with only artificial teeth did not show a good deformation rate.
Keywords: Artificial tooth, Deformation, Dentures, Three-dimensional printing, Ultrasonic cleaner
Journal of Technologic Dentistry 2024; 46(1): 8-14
Published online March 30, 2024 https://doi.org/10.14347/jtd.2024.46.1.8
Copyright © Korean Academy of Dental Technology.
김동연1, 이광영2
1경동대학교 치기공학과, 2원광보건대학교 치기공과
Dong-Yeon Kim1 , Gwang-Young Lee2
1Department of Dental Technology, Kyungdong University, Wonju, Korea
2Department of Dental Laboratory Technology, Wonkwang Health Science University, Iksan, Korea
Correspondence to:Gwang-Young Lee
Department of Dental Laboratory Technology, Wonkwang Health Science University, 514 Iksan-daero, Iksan 54538, Korea
E-mail: leegy@wu.ac.kr
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1826-6870
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Purpose: This study compares the deformation of traditional resin dentures to resin dentures printed with digital light processing (DLP).
Methods: Eleven edentulous research models were developed. Ten of them were made with traditional resin dentures. The remaining one was prepared for scanning and 3D (three-dimensional) printing. Ten traditional resin dentures were made, with the remaining artificial teeth created using 3D software and a DLP printer. Traditional resin dentures, 3D-printed resin denture artificial teeth, and a denture base with artificial teeth were all cleaned simultaneously in an ultrasonic cleaner for 3 minutes. Three groups were assigned four artificial tooth measurement points, which were then measured with digital calipers. The measured data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The significance test was conducted using a nonparametric test Kruskal-Wallis test due to the small number of specimens (α=0.05).
Results: The traditional resin dentures had the lowest strain rate at –0.04%, while the group that manufactured only artificial teeth had the highest strain rate at –0.09%. However, no statistically significant difference was observed between the 3 groups (p>0.05).
Conclusion: During ultraviolet-type ultrasonic cleaning, traditional resin dentures (TD group) and denture base with artificial teeth made of DLP (DD group) demonstrated stable durability, whereas the artificial teeth made of DLP (AD group) with only artificial teeth did not show a good deformation rate.
Keywords: Artificial tooth, Deformation, Dentures, Three-dimensional printing, Ultrasonic cleaner
Table 1 . Overall results after UV-type ultrasonic cleaning in 3 groups (n=10) (unit=%).
Group | Mean±SD | Median | 95% CI | p-value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Min | Max | ||||
TD | –0.04±0.46 | –0.13 | –0.16 | 0.07 | 0.272 |
AD | –0.09±0.40 | –0.10 | –0.20 | –0.02 | |
DD | –0.05±0.39 | 0.00 | –0.15 | 0.05 |
UV: ultraviolet, TD: traditional resin dentures, AD: artificial teeth made of digital light processing, DD: denture base with artificial teeth made of digital light processing, SD: standard deviation, CI: confidence interval..
Table 2 . Results before and after UV type ultrasonic cleaner at various measurement points in three groups (n=10) (unit=%).
Measurement area | Group | p-value | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TD | AD | DD | |||||||
Mean±SD | Median | Mean±SD | Median | Mean±SD | Median | ||||
ab | –0.14±0.27 | –0.14 | –0.21±0.41 | –0.10 | 0.13±0.27 | 0.15 | 0.071 | ||
cd | –0.14±0.19 | –0.15 | 0.07±0.37 | –0.10 | 0.03±0.16 | 0.00 | 0.245 | ||
ac | –0.23±0.32 | –0.21 | –0.14±0.50 | –0.20 | –0.15±0.54 | 0.05 | 0.563 | ||
bd | 0.12±0.39 | –0.08 | –0.08±0.57 | 0.00 | –0.16±0.65 | –0.20 | 0.481 | ||
ad | 0.00±0.23 | 0.08 | –0.16±0.22 | –0.10 | 0.02±0.19 | 0.00 | 0.214 | ||
bc | 0.13±0.92 | –0.12 | –0.02±0.32 | 0.05 | –0.11±0.31 | 0.00 | 0.689 |
UV: ultraviolet, TD: traditional resin dentures, AD: artificial teeth made of digital light processing, DD: denture base with artificial teeth made of digital light processing, SD: standard deviation..
Dong-Yeon Kim, Gwang-Young Lee
Journal of Technologic Dentistry 2021; 43(3): 84-92 https://doi.org/10.14347/jtd.2021.43.3.84Dong-Yeon Kim, Gwang-Young Lee
Journal of Technologic Dentistry 2024; 46(2): 28-35 https://doi.org/10.14347/jtd.2024.46.2.28Ki-Baek Kim
Journal of Technologic Dentistry 2022; 44(4): 126-131 https://doi.org/10.14347/jtd.2022.44.4.126