Evaluation of a 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composite versus a milled resin composite for flexural strength, wear and color stability

Abstract Background Controversial properties and performance of commercially available 3D-printed resin composite for permanent restorations. So, the purpose of this study was to assess the flexural strength, microhardness, wear, and color stability of 3D-printed versus milled nanohybrid resin compo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ghydaa A. Mahran, Ahmed El-Banna, Dalia I. El-Korashy
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2025-04-01
Series:BMC Oral Health
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-05861-2
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850181112875188224
author Ghydaa A. Mahran
Ahmed El-Banna
Dalia I. El-Korashy
author_facet Ghydaa A. Mahran
Ahmed El-Banna
Dalia I. El-Korashy
author_sort Ghydaa A. Mahran
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background Controversial properties and performance of commercially available 3D-printed resin composite for permanent restorations. So, the purpose of this study was to assess the flexural strength, microhardness, wear, and color stability of 3D-printed versus milled nanohybrid resin composites for permanent restoration. Methods A total of 70 samples of nanohybrid resin composites were used; 38 bar-shaped (14 mm ⋅ 2 mm ⋅ 2 mm) and 32 disc-shaped samples (10 mm ⋅ 2 mm) of Tetric CAD™ blocks (TC) and Flexcera Smile Ultra plus™ (FSU) were fabricated (n = 35). Flexural properties were tested using 3-point bending test. The Vickers test was used for microhardness evaluation. Volumetric wear analysis and color changes were assessed after simulated aging via Geomagic Control X software and a Vita Easyshade spectrophotometer, respectively. Color changes were calculated via the CIEDE2000 formula. A paired t-test was used for dependent variable analysis, and the Mann‒Whitney U test was used for independent variables (α = 0.05). Results TC resulted in significantly higher flexural strength (247.7 ± 29.1 MPa) and microhardness (94.6 ± 3 gf/um2) than did FSU (97.2 ± 10.2 MPa and 31 ± 4.6 gf/um2, respectively) (P < 0.0001). Compared with FSU (–36.3 mm3), TC resulted in significantly lower wear rates (–17.6 mm3)(P < 0.0001). TC had a ΔE00 value of 2.4 ± 0.5, whereas FSU had a value of 2.1 ± 0.7 (P = 0.532), with no significant difference between the groups, but both values were above the acceptability limit (1.8). Conclusions Compared with 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composites, milled nanohybrid resin composites have better flexural strength, microhardness and wear properties. Clinical relevance Milled nanohybrid resin composites exhibit superior flexural strength, microhardness, and wear resistance, making them potentially more durable for clinical dental restorations compared to 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composites.
format Article
id doaj-art-28846aeb0a4b4428ade9fdee02f63a2c
institution OA Journals
issn 1472-6831
language English
publishDate 2025-04-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Oral Health
spelling doaj-art-28846aeb0a4b4428ade9fdee02f63a2c2025-08-20T02:17:58ZengBMCBMC Oral Health1472-68312025-04-0125111010.1186/s12903-025-05861-2Evaluation of a 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composite versus a milled resin composite for flexural strength, wear and color stabilityGhydaa A. Mahran0Ahmed El-Banna1Dalia I. El-Korashy2Department of Biomaterials, Faculty of Dentistry, Suez UniversityDepartment of Biomaterials, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams UniversityDepartment of Biomaterials, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams UniversityAbstract Background Controversial properties and performance of commercially available 3D-printed resin composite for permanent restorations. So, the purpose of this study was to assess the flexural strength, microhardness, wear, and color stability of 3D-printed versus milled nanohybrid resin composites for permanent restoration. Methods A total of 70 samples of nanohybrid resin composites were used; 38 bar-shaped (14 mm ⋅ 2 mm ⋅ 2 mm) and 32 disc-shaped samples (10 mm ⋅ 2 mm) of Tetric CAD™ blocks (TC) and Flexcera Smile Ultra plus™ (FSU) were fabricated (n = 35). Flexural properties were tested using 3-point bending test. The Vickers test was used for microhardness evaluation. Volumetric wear analysis and color changes were assessed after simulated aging via Geomagic Control X software and a Vita Easyshade spectrophotometer, respectively. Color changes were calculated via the CIEDE2000 formula. A paired t-test was used for dependent variable analysis, and the Mann‒Whitney U test was used for independent variables (α = 0.05). Results TC resulted in significantly higher flexural strength (247.7 ± 29.1 MPa) and microhardness (94.6 ± 3 gf/um2) than did FSU (97.2 ± 10.2 MPa and 31 ± 4.6 gf/um2, respectively) (P < 0.0001). Compared with FSU (–36.3 mm3), TC resulted in significantly lower wear rates (–17.6 mm3)(P < 0.0001). TC had a ΔE00 value of 2.4 ± 0.5, whereas FSU had a value of 2.1 ± 0.7 (P = 0.532), with no significant difference between the groups, but both values were above the acceptability limit (1.8). Conclusions Compared with 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composites, milled nanohybrid resin composites have better flexural strength, microhardness and wear properties. Clinical relevance Milled nanohybrid resin composites exhibit superior flexural strength, microhardness, and wear resistance, making them potentially more durable for clinical dental restorations compared to 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composites.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-05861-2CAD/CAM3D-printingMillingThermocyclingWearColor stability
spellingShingle Ghydaa A. Mahran
Ahmed El-Banna
Dalia I. El-Korashy
Evaluation of a 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composite versus a milled resin composite for flexural strength, wear and color stability
BMC Oral Health
CAD/CAM
3D-printing
Milling
Thermocycling
Wear
Color stability
title Evaluation of a 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composite versus a milled resin composite for flexural strength, wear and color stability
title_full Evaluation of a 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composite versus a milled resin composite for flexural strength, wear and color stability
title_fullStr Evaluation of a 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composite versus a milled resin composite for flexural strength, wear and color stability
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of a 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composite versus a milled resin composite for flexural strength, wear and color stability
title_short Evaluation of a 3D-printed nanohybrid resin composite versus a milled resin composite for flexural strength, wear and color stability
title_sort evaluation of a 3d printed nanohybrid resin composite versus a milled resin composite for flexural strength wear and color stability
topic CAD/CAM
3D-printing
Milling
Thermocycling
Wear
Color stability
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-05861-2
work_keys_str_mv AT ghydaaamahran evaluationofa3dprintednanohybridresincompositeversusamilledresincompositeforflexuralstrengthwearandcolorstability
AT ahmedelbanna evaluationofa3dprintednanohybridresincompositeversusamilledresincompositeforflexuralstrengthwearandcolorstability
AT daliaielkorashy evaluationofa3dprintednanohybridresincompositeversusamilledresincompositeforflexuralstrengthwearandcolorstability