Journal of Prosthodontics· 2026Q1
Fit and fracture resistance of 3D‐printed single crowns made from highly translucent zirconia
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
3D-printed 5Y-PSZ single crowns show clinically promising fit and fracture resistance, comparable to milled crowns, though rapid debinding may reduce mechanical reliability in thicker restorations.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- 3D-printed crowns had significantly larger circular cement gaps (124.8-125.0 µm) than milled crowns (77.4 µm) but smaller occlusal gaps (95.6-96.8 µm vs. 157.0 µm).
- Mean marginal cement gaps were below 80 µm for all groups, indicating clinically acceptable fit.
- At 0.7 mm thickness, 3D-printed crowns showed higher fracture resistance (1022-1286 N) than milled crowns (664 N).
- At 1.5 mm thickness, milled crowns had superior fracture resistance (3318 N) compared to 3D-printed crowns (1904-2384 N).
- Rapid debinding did not significantly affect fit or fracture resistance but showed lower values and greater variability in thicker printed crowns.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the fit and fracture resistance of 3D-printed and milled single crowns made from highly translucent zirconia (5Y-PSZ) and to evaluate the influence of two debinding/presintering protocols. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single crowns were fabricated either by 3D printing or milling. For fit evaluation (n = 10/group), crowns with a wall thickness of 0.7 mm were cemented, sectioned, and analyzed microscopically at predefined locations. For fracture resistance testing (n = 10/group), crowns with wall thicknesses of 0.7 mm and 1.5 mm were cemented to fiber-reinforced composite abutments. Conservative (cons DB) and a fast (fast DB) debinding and presintering protocols were applied to the 3D-printed groups. RESULTS: 3D-printed crowns showed significantly larger circular (cons DB: 124.8 µm; fast DB: 125.0 µm vs. 77.4 µm) cement gaps than milled crowns (p < 0.001), whereas their occlusal gaps were significantly smaller (cons DB: 96.8 µm; fast DB: 95.6 µm vs. 157.0 µm; p = 0.030). Mean marginal cement gaps in vertical and tangential directions were below 80 µm for all groups. The debinding protocol did not significantly affect fit. Fracture resistance was significantly influenced by manufacturing technique: at 0.7 mm wall thickness, 3D-printed crowns showed the highest values (cons DB: 1022N; fast DB: 1286N vs. 664N; p < 0.050), whereas milled crowns showed superior fracture resistance at 1.5 mm wall thickness (cons DB: 2384N; fast DB: 1904N vs. 3318N; p < 0.050). The debinding protocol had no significant effect on fracture resistance, although lower values and greater variability were observed following the fast DB protocol, particularly for 1.5 mm crowns. CONCLUSION: 3D-printed 5Y-PSZ single crowns demonstrated clinically promising fit and fracture resistance overall, with performance broadly comparable to milled crowns. However, rapid debinding may compromise the mechanical reliability of thicker printed restorations.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Journal of Prosthodontics, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Orthodontics
OrthodonticsDentistry