Evaluation of biofilm formation on acrylic resins used to fabricate dental temporary restorations with the use of 3D printing technology
- PMID: 36229871
- PMCID: PMC9563793
- DOI: 10.1186/s12903-022-02488-5
Evaluation of biofilm formation on acrylic resins used to fabricate dental temporary restorations with the use of 3D printing technology
Abstract
Background: Temporary implant-retained restorations are required to support function and esthetics of the masticatory system until the final restoration is completed and delivered. Acrylic resins are commonly used in prosthetic dentistry and lately they have been used in three-dimensional (3D) printing technology. Since this technology it is fairly new, the number of studies on their susceptibility to microbial adhesion is low. Restorations placed even for a short period of time may become the reservoir for microorganisms that may affect the peri-implant tissues and trigger inflammation endangering further procedures. The aim of the study was to test the biofilm formation on acrylamide resins used to fabricate temporary restorations in 3D printing technology and to assess if the post-processing impacts microbial adhesion.
Methods: Disk-shaped samples were manufactured using the 3D printing technique from three commercially available UV-curable resins consisting of acrylate and methacrylate oligomers with various time and inhibitors of polymerization (NextDent MFH bleach, NextDent 3D Plus, MazicD Temp). The tested samples were raw, polished and glazed. The ability to create biofilm by oral streptococci (S. mutans, S. sanguinis, S. oralis, S. mitis) was tested, as well as species with higher pathogenic potential: Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis and Candida albicans. The roughness of the materials was measured by an atomic force microscope. Biofilm formation was assessed after 72 h of incubation by crystal violet staining with absorbance measurement, quantification of viable microorganisms, and imaging with a scanning electron microscope (SEM).
Results: Each tested species formed the biofilm on the samples of all three resins. Post-production processing resulted in reduced roughness parameters and biofilm abundance. Polishing and glazing reduced roughness parameters significantly in the NextDent resin group, while glazing alone caused significant surface smoothing in Mazic Temp. A thin layer of microbial biofilm covered glazed resin surfaces with a small number of microorganisms for all tested strains except S. oralis and S. epidermidis, while raw and polished surfaces were covered with a dense biofilm, rich in microorganisms.
Conclusions: UV-curing acrylic resins used for fabricating temporary restorations in the 3D technology are the interim solution, but are susceptible to adhesion and biofilm formation by oral streptococci, staphylococci and Candida. Post-processing and particularly glazing process significantly reduce bacterial biofilm formation and the risk of failure of final restoration.
Keywords: 3D printing technology; Acrylate resins; Biofilm; Provisional restorations.
© 2022. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Figures


Similar articles
-
Evaluation of surface roughness, wettability and adhesion of multispecies biofilm on 3D-printed resins for the base and teeth of complete dentures.J Appl Oral Sci. 2024 Apr 19;32:e20230326. doi: 10.1590/1678-7757-2023-0326. eCollection 2024. J Appl Oral Sci. 2024. PMID: 38656049
-
Effects of printing orientation and artificial ageing on martens hardness and indentation modulus of 3D printed restorative resin materials.Dent Mater. 2024 Jul;40(7):1003-1014. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2024.05.005. Epub 2024 May 11. Dent Mater. 2024. PMID: 38735775
-
Influence of 3D printing system, postpolymerization and aging protocols on resin flexural strength and dimensional stability for printing occlusal splints, models and temporary restorations.Clin Oral Investig. 2024 Oct 19;28(11):604. doi: 10.1007/s00784-024-05998-4. Clin Oral Investig. 2024. PMID: 39425803
-
The flexural strength of 3D-printed provisional restorations fabricated with different resins: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC Oral Health. 2024 Jan 10;24(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03826-x. BMC Oral Health. 2024. PMID: 38200473 Free PMC article.
-
Systematic Review of the Quality of Stereolithographic Three-Dimensionally Printed Materials for Provisional Dental Restorations.Materials (Basel). 2025 Feb 6;18(3):721. doi: 10.3390/ma18030721. Materials (Basel). 2025. PMID: 39942383 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Properties of 3D-Printed resins for interim restorations: effects of printing and post-curing protocols.Braz Oral Res. 2025 Feb 21;39:e019. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2025.vol39.019. eCollection 2025. Braz Oral Res. 2025. PMID: 40008728 Free PMC article.
-
Biofilm inhibition of denture cleaning tablets and carvacrol on denture bases produced with different techniques.Clin Oral Investig. 2024 Jul 5;28(7):413. doi: 10.1007/s00784-024-05810-3. Clin Oral Investig. 2024. PMID: 38965139 Free PMC article.
-
Digital Workflow in Full Mouth Rehabilitation with Immediate Loading, Intraoral Welding and 3D-Printed Reconstructions in a Periodontal Patient: A Case Report.Reports (MDPI). 2023 Nov 1;6(4):52. doi: 10.3390/reports6040052. Reports (MDPI). 2023. PMID: 40729175 Free PMC article.
-
Microbiological evaluation of conjunctival anopthalmic flora after using digital 3D-printed ocular prosthesis compared to conventional one: a randomized clinical trial.BMC Oral Health. 2023 Dec 18;23(1):1012. doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03746-w. BMC Oral Health. 2023. PMID: 38110937 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Comparative physical and mechanical properties of a 3D printed temporary crown and bridge restorative material.J Clin Exp Dent. 2023 Jun 1;15(6):e464-e469. doi: 10.4317/jced.60507. eCollection 2023 Jun. J Clin Exp Dent. 2023. PMID: 37388428 Free PMC article.
References
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Molecular Biology Databases