Beatriz Sona Cardoso, Mariana Brito da Cruz, Joana Faria Marques, João Carlos Roque, João Paulo Martins, Rodrigo Cordeiro Malheiro, António Duarte da Mata
{"title":"使用制造商推荐的打印机和第三方打印机生产的 3D 打印牙科树脂的细胞反应。","authors":"Beatriz Sona Cardoso, Mariana Brito da Cruz, Joana Faria Marques, João Carlos Roque, João Paulo Martins, Rodrigo Cordeiro Malheiro, António Duarte da Mata","doi":"10.4047/jap.2024.16.2.126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different 3D dental resins, using a manufacturer recommended printer and a third-party printer, on cellular responses of human gingival cells.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Three NextDent resins (Denture 3D+, C&B MFH and Crowntec) were used to produce specimens on printers NextDent 5100 (groups ND, NC and NT, respectively) and Phrozen Sonic Mini 4K (groups PD, PC and PT, respectively). Human gingival fibroblasts were cultured and biocompatibility was evaluated on days 1, 3 and 7. IL-6 and IL-8 concentrations were evaluated at 3 days using ELISA. Surface roughness was evaluated by a contact profilometer. SEM and fluorescence micrographs were analyzed at days 1 and 7. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS and mean differences were tested using ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests (<i>P</i> < .05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was an increase in cellular viability after 7 days in groups PC and PT, when compared to group PD. ND group resulted in higher concentration of IL-6 when compared to PT group. SEM and fluorescence micrographs showed less adhesion and thinner morphology of fibroblasts from group PD. No significant differences were found regarding surface roughness.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of different printers or resins did not seem to influence surface roughness. NextDent 5100 and Phrozen Sonic Mini 4K produced resins with similar cellular responses in human gingival fibroblasts. However, Denture 3D+ resin resulted in significantly lower biocompatibility, when compared to C&B MFH and Crowntec resins. Further testing is required to support its long-term use, required for complete dentures.</p>","PeriodicalId":51291,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics","volume":"16 2","pages":"126-138"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11058352/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cellular responses to 3D printed dental resins produced using a manufacturer recommended printer versus a third party printer.\",\"authors\":\"Beatriz Sona Cardoso, Mariana Brito da Cruz, Joana Faria Marques, João Carlos Roque, João Paulo Martins, Rodrigo Cordeiro Malheiro, António Duarte da Mata\",\"doi\":\"10.4047/jap.2024.16.2.126\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different 3D dental resins, using a manufacturer recommended printer and a third-party printer, on cellular responses of human gingival cells.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Three NextDent resins (Denture 3D+, C&B MFH and Crowntec) were used to produce specimens on printers NextDent 5100 (groups ND, NC and NT, respectively) and Phrozen Sonic Mini 4K (groups PD, PC and PT, respectively). Human gingival fibroblasts were cultured and biocompatibility was evaluated on days 1, 3 and 7. IL-6 and IL-8 concentrations were evaluated at 3 days using ELISA. Surface roughness was evaluated by a contact profilometer. SEM and fluorescence micrographs were analyzed at days 1 and 7. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS and mean differences were tested using ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests (<i>P</i> < .05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was an increase in cellular viability after 7 days in groups PC and PT, when compared to group PD. ND group resulted in higher concentration of IL-6 when compared to PT group. SEM and fluorescence micrographs showed less adhesion and thinner morphology of fibroblasts from group PD. No significant differences were found regarding surface roughness.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of different printers or resins did not seem to influence surface roughness. NextDent 5100 and Phrozen Sonic Mini 4K produced resins with similar cellular responses in human gingival fibroblasts. However, Denture 3D+ resin resulted in significantly lower biocompatibility, when compared to C&B MFH and Crowntec resins. Further testing is required to support its long-term use, required for complete dentures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics\",\"volume\":\"16 2\",\"pages\":\"126-138\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11058352/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2024.16.2.126\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2024.16.2.126","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Cellular responses to 3D printed dental resins produced using a manufacturer recommended printer versus a third party printer.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different 3D dental resins, using a manufacturer recommended printer and a third-party printer, on cellular responses of human gingival cells.
Materials and methods: Three NextDent resins (Denture 3D+, C&B MFH and Crowntec) were used to produce specimens on printers NextDent 5100 (groups ND, NC and NT, respectively) and Phrozen Sonic Mini 4K (groups PD, PC and PT, respectively). Human gingival fibroblasts were cultured and biocompatibility was evaluated on days 1, 3 and 7. IL-6 and IL-8 concentrations were evaluated at 3 days using ELISA. Surface roughness was evaluated by a contact profilometer. SEM and fluorescence micrographs were analyzed at days 1 and 7. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS and mean differences were tested using ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests (P < .05).
Results: There was an increase in cellular viability after 7 days in groups PC and PT, when compared to group PD. ND group resulted in higher concentration of IL-6 when compared to PT group. SEM and fluorescence micrographs showed less adhesion and thinner morphology of fibroblasts from group PD. No significant differences were found regarding surface roughness.
Conclusion: The use of different printers or resins did not seem to influence surface roughness. NextDent 5100 and Phrozen Sonic Mini 4K produced resins with similar cellular responses in human gingival fibroblasts. However, Denture 3D+ resin resulted in significantly lower biocompatibility, when compared to C&B MFH and Crowntec resins. Further testing is required to support its long-term use, required for complete dentures.
期刊介绍:
This journal aims to convey scientific and clinical progress in the field of prosthodontics and its related areas to many dental communities concerned with esthetic and functional restorations, occlusion, implants, prostheses, and biomaterials related to prosthodontics.
This journal publishes
• Original research data of high scientific merit in the field of diagnosis, function, esthetics and stomatognathic physiology related to prosthodontic rehabilitation, physiology and mechanics of occlusion, mechanical and biologic aspects of prosthodontic materials including dental implants.
• Review articles by experts on controversies and new developments in prosthodontics.
• Case reports if they provide or document new fundamental knowledge.