Three-dimensional printing is commonly used to fabricate provisional dental restorations. Studies have reported that changes in printing orientation affect the physical and mechanical properties of 3D-printed polymeric provisional restorations; however the findings have been inconsistent. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to analyze the articles evaluating the influence of printing orientation on the physical and mechanical properties of 3D-printed polymeric provisional dental restorations. Recommendations provided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to structure and compose the review. The PICO (Participant, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) question ordered was: ‘Do 3D-printed provisional dental restorations (P) printed at various orientations (except 0°) (I) exhibit similar physical and mechanical properties (O) when compared to those printed at a 0° orientation (C)?’. An electronic search was conducted on 28 and 29 April 2025, by two independent researchers across four databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) to systematically collect relevant articles published up to March 2025. After removing duplicate articles and applying predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, twenty-one articles were incorporated into this review. Self-designed Performa’s were used to tabulate all relevant information. For the quality analysis, the modified CONSORT scale was utilized. The quantitative analysis was performed on only fifteen out of twenty-one articles. It can be concluded that the printing orientation affects some of the tested properties, which include fracture strength (significantly higher for specimens printed at 0° when compared to 90°), wear resistance (significantly higher for specimens printed at 90° when compared to 0°), microhardness (significantly higher for specimens printed at 90°and 45° when compared to 0°), color stability (high at 0°), and surface roughness (significantly higher for specimens printed at 45° and 90° when compared to 0°). There were varied outcomes in terms of flexural strength and elastic modulus.
Firas K. Alqarawi (2025) studied this question.