This study evaluates optimal post-processing times and curing durations for 3D-printed surgical guides, suggesting improvements in mechanical properties and safety.
This study evaluated post-processing protocols for 3D-printed implant surgical guides, aiming to determine the ideal timing after printing and post-curing durations that do not compromise residual monomer release and leachable components or mechanical properties. Specimens made of a surgical guide resin were 3D-printed (Formlabs Form 2) into bars (14 × 1 × 1 mm; n = 10) and square-shaped samples (10 × 10 × 1 mm; n = 1). They were grouped based on the time elapsed after printing (immediate, 24 h, and 72 h) and underwent washing in 99% isopropyl alcohol. Post-curing was performed for 5, 10, 20, or 30 min using a UV-light curing unit (NextDent LC-3DPrint Box). Residual monomer and components levels were assessed through solvent dissolution tests (n = 5), while mechanical properties were evaluated via flexural strength (n = 10) and hardness (n = 10). Statistical analysis with one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test showed no significant differences in flexural strength across curing times or storage periods (p > 0.05), with values ranging from 42.93 MPa to 59.43 MPa. Monomers and leachable components were significantly higher immediately after printing (0.84 ± 0.36 mm3) compared to other groups (p < 0.05). For Vickers hardness, a 10 min curing protocol produced values comparable to longer durations (20.26 HV at 20 min/24 h), while the lowest hardness was 14.59 HV in the 5 min groups (p < 0.001). These findings suggest that delaying post-processing up to 72 h and reducing curing time to 10 min do not compromise mechanical properties, released monomers, and leachable components.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Packaeser et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: