Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Printing orientation may influence the fit of additively manufactured provisional fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). This in vitro study evaluated 108 three-unit FDPs fabricated with a liquid crystal display-based masked stereolithography printer at nine combinations of buccolingual (150°, 180°, 210°) and mesiodistal (0°, 15°, 45°) angulations, with 12 FDPs per combination. Marginal, cervical, axial, axio-occlusal, and occlusal gaps were assessed by silicone replicas seated on a cobalt–chromium master model under finger pressure. Regional means from 28 measurements per abutment underwent separate unequal-variance factorial analyses with Holm adjustment. Buccolingual effects were detected for all regions; mesiodistal effects were detected for all regions except the premolar axial gap. At 0° mesiodistal angulation, the marginal-gap difference between 150° and 180° buccolingual orientations was 624.38 μm (95% confidence interval 470.87–777.88) for premolars and 442.02 μm (323.73–560.31) for molars. The 180°/0° and 180°/15° combinations generally had lower marginal and occlusal means, but the smallest axial means occurred at 210°/0°. These findings describe the tested orientation and support configurations; they do not establish a universal optimum or clinical performance.
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: