You might also read
Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.
This review summarizes the current state of additive manufacturing (AM) technologies for processing zirconia in dental applications. It evaluates various AM methods like vat photopolymerization, material extrusion, and selective laser sintering. The review found that while AM can produce zirconia without major issues, the mechanical properties of printed zirconia are generally lower than those made using conventional methods. Variations in material composition across different AM technologies make it difficult to establish a standardized classification system. The authors suggest that further improvements in material composition and AM processes are needed before zirconia can be widely used in dental reconstructions.
Area of Science:
Background:
Current knowledge on additive manufacturing (AM) for dental ceramics is fragmented. Established methods rely on conventional sintering and machining. No unified classification system exists for AM technologies applied to zirconia. Prior research has shown AM's potential for complex geometries but lacks consistency in material outcomes. Variability in zirconia slurry composition across studies complicates comparisons. Mechanical properties of AM zirconia remain understudied in dental contexts. No prior work had resolved how different AM processes affect zirconia's performance in dental reconstructions. This gap motivated a comprehensive review of AM technologies for zirconia processing.
Purpose Of The Study:
This review aimed to evaluate the current state of AM technologies for zirconia in dental applications. The specific problem is the lack of standardized classifications and performance metrics for AM zirconia. The motivation stems from the need to assess AM's viability as a replacement for traditional methods. The study focused on identifying which AM technologies are used for zirconia and their reported outcomes. It sought to clarify how material composition influences mechanical properties. The goal was to determine if AM zirconia meets dental standards. The review also aimed to highlight areas needing further research. This approach helps guide future developments in AM dental materials.
The main technologies include vat photopolymerization, material extrusion, selective laser sintering (SLM), and binder jetting. These methods differ in how they process zirconia slurries or powders.
The review found that AM zirconia generally has lower mechanical properties than conventionally manufactured zirconia. This suggests further improvements are needed for dental applications.
Variations in zirconia slurry composition across different AM technologies make it difficult to standardize processes and compare results. This complicates the establishment of a classification system.
SLM is one of the most frequently reported AM technologies for zirconia. It involves using laser energy to sinter powdered materials into solid structures, but its effectiveness depends on material composition.
Main Methods:
The review approach involved a comprehensive literature search using electronic databases and MeSH terms. Keywords were selected to capture AM technologies and zirconia processing. The search was limited to English-language, peer-reviewed articles published between 1999 and 2018. A total of 62 articles were included after screening for relevance. The selection criteria focused on full-text articles describing AM processes for zirconia. Six articles specifically addressed dental applications. The review synthesized findings on AM technologies like vat photopolymerization and selective laser sintering. It evaluated how each technology's material composition affected outcomes.
Main Results:
The strongest finding is that AM technologies can process zirconia without major technical issues. However, mechanical properties of printed zirconia are generally lower than conventional methods. Vat photopolymerization and material extrusion showed variability in material composition. Selective laser sintering and melting were frequently reported for zirconia. Material jetting and binder jetting also appeared in literature but with limited data. The review found no clear consensus on optimal AM processes for zirconia dental reconstructions. Variations in zirconia slurry composition across studies made comparisons difficult. The results suggest that AM zirconia requires further material and process improvements.
Conclusions:
The authors propose that AM technologies for zirconia are technically feasible but not yet optimized for dental use. Synthesis of findings suggests that material composition plays a key role in determining mechanical properties. The review highlights the need for standardized classifications of AM technologies for zirconia. It also indicates that further improvements in AM processes are necessary before zirconia can be considered for standard dental care. The authors suggest that advances in material composition could enhance AM zirconia's performance. The findings imply that current AM zirconia reconstructions may not meet clinical standards. The review does not claim that AM is essential for zirconia processing but suggests it is a promising area. The authors conclude that AM zirconia requires further research and development.
Binder jetting is a sheet lamination technology used for AM zirconia, but the review found limited data on its performance compared to other methods.
The authors propose that further improvements in material composition and AM processes are necessary before zirconia can be considered for standard dental care.