The effect of printing parameters on the surface characteristics of three-dimensional (3D)-printed denture base resins (DBRs) is neglected. Therefore, this study investigated the effect of printing orientation and post-curing time on the surface roughness and hardness. One conventional heat-polymerized (HP) resin and two 3D-printing resins (NextDent (ND) and ASIGA (AS)) were used to fabricate a total of 250-disc (10 × 2.5 mm) specimens. ND and AS specimens were printed with different orientations (0-, 45-, and 90-degree) and each orientation group was subjected to four post-curing times (30, 60, 90, 120 min). Printed specimens were thermo-cycled (10,000 cycles) followed by the measuring of surface roughness (Profilometer (Ra)) and hardness (a Vickers hardness (VH)). ANOVA and post hoc tests were used for data analysis (α = 0.05) at significant levels. AS and ND showed no significant changes in Ra when compared with HP (p ˃ 0.05), except the 45-degree orientation (AS/90 min and AS/120 min) significantly increased surface roughness (p ˂ 0.001). There was no significant difference in Ra with different orientations and post-curing time for both materials AS and ND (p ˃ 0.05). Compared with HP, 3D-printed DBRs showed low VH values (p ˂ 0.001). For AS, 90-degree orientation showed a significant decrease in VH at 60, 90, and 120 min when compared with 0- and 45-degree orientation (p ˂ 0.001), while ND showed no significant difference in VH with different printing orientations (p ˃ 0.05). The VH of AS and ND improved when increasing post-curing time to 120 min (p ˂ 0.001), and the printing orientations and post-curing time did not affect the Ra of 3D-printed DBRs.

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface roughness, contact angle, and adhesion of Candida albicans to computer-aided designing/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and heat-polymerized (HP) denture base materials. Materials and Methods Specimens were allocated to six groups based on the composition of studied denture base materials, HP acrylic resin, milled resins (AvaDent and IvoCad), and 3D-printed resins (ASIGA, FormLabs, and NextDent). Ten specimens per group were used for each test (n = 10/test). Surface roughness and contact angles were analyzed using profilometer and goniometer, respectively. Adhesion of C. albicans was counted using colony-forming unit (CFU/mL). Means and standard deviations were calculated, and then one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by Tukey's post hoc test. Correlation of Candida adhesion and surface parameters was determined by using Pearson's correlation analysis. Results No statistically significant difference was noted in surface roughness between HP, milled, and 3D-printed denture base resins except NextDent, which showed significantly higher roughness in comparison to all other resins (p = 0.001). In terms of contact angle, milled resins had the lowest value, followed by HP, ASIGA, and FormLabs, whereas NextDent showed the highest contact angle (p = 0.001). C. albicans adhesion showed no significant difference between all denture base resins. A positive and significant correlation was found between C. albicans adhesion and contact angle (p = 0.003), while no correlation was reported between C. albicans adhesion and surface roughness (p = 0.523). Conclusion Adhesion of C. albicans was similar in all tested specimens. Surface roughness showed no significant difference between all groups except NextDent, which had the highest value. Milled denture base resins had the lowest contact angle among all groups.

Purpose: This study evaluates and compares the effect of printing layer thickness (LT) and post-polymerization time (PPT) on the flexural strength and hardness of three 3D-printed resins after thermal aging. Methods: A bar shape (64 × 10 × 3.3 mm) and a disc shape (15 × 2 mm) were designed for flexural strength and hardness testing, respectively. ASIGA, NextDent, and FormLabs 3D-printed resins were used to print specimens with different LTs (25 µm, 50 µm, and 100 µm). Each thickness group was post-polymerized (PP) for different times (15, 30, 60, and 90 min). All printed specimens were thermally cycled (5000 cycles) and then tested, measuring the flexural strength and hardness using a universal testing machine and Vickers hardness tester, respectively. The data were analyzed using ANOVA and a post hoc Tukey’s test (α = 0.05). Results: A PPT of 90 min showed the highest flexural strength. In comparisons of the LTs, 25 µm and 50 µm significantly increased flexural strength compared with 100 µm, which showed the lowest value for each PPT. The hardness increased as the PPT increased for all materials. In our LT comparison, 25 µm and 50 µm significantly increased the hardness for NextDent and FormLabs resins, while only 25 µm showed high hardness compared with 50 µm and 100 µm for ASIGA. Conclusion: Both parameters (LT and PPT) impact flexural strength and hardness. Increased PPT with the minimum LT is recommended.