Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evaluates fracture load and surface roughness in provisional FPDs, suggesting optimal angulation settings.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of build orientation on the fracture load and surface roughness of three-unit provisional fixed partial dentures (FPDs) fabricated by digital light processing (DLP). METHODS: In this in vitro study, standardized three-unit FPDs were designed and fabricated using a DLP 3D printer at three buccolingual angulations (150°, 180°, and 210°) and three mesiodistal angulations (0°, 15°, and 45°) (n = 12 per group). Surface roughness (Ra, µm) was measured using a profilometer, and fracture load (N) was determined using a universal testing machine. Surface roughness data were analyzed using three-way repeated-measures ANOVA, while fracture load data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey post hoc tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Buccolingual and mesiodistal angulations significantly affected surface roughness (p < 0.001) and fracture load (p < 0.001). The lowest surface roughness was observed at 210° buccolingual and 45° mesiodistal angulation, whereas the highest fracture load was recorded at 210° buccolingual and 0° mesiodistal angulation. The effect of location on surface roughness was not significant (p = 0.309). CONCLUSIONS: Build orientation significantly influences the surface and mechanical performance of 3D-printed provisional FPDs. The 210-degree buccolingual angulation showed favorable outcomes under specific mesiodistal conditions; however, the optimal mesiodistal angulation depended on the desired outcome, with 45 degrees improving surface smoothness and 0 degrees enhancing fracture resistance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arshad et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: