Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 29, 2025
Impact of Fabrication Techniques and Polishing Procedures on Surface Roughness of Denture Base Resins
Published on: January 17, 2025
Influence of postprinting cleaning methods on the cleaning efficiency and surface and mechanical properties of
Ok Hyung Nam1, Sang-Yeop Chung2, Hong-Keun Hyun3
1Associate Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Kyung Hee University, College of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea; and Associate Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Statement Of Problem:
The outcome of photopolymerized 3-dimensional (3D) printing is influenced by the methods used for postprinting cleaning, yet information on postprinting cleaning is sparse.
Purpose:
The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess the cleaning efficiency and surface and mechanical properties of 3D printed resin according to postprinting cleaning methods.
Material And Methods:
Specimens were fabricated from a 3D model using resin materials (NextDent C&B MFH and DIOnavi-P. MAX) and were tested for postprinting cleaning methods for 5 minutes with isopropyl alcohol, isopropyl alcohol + ultrasonic, ethyl alcohol, ethyl alcohol + ultrasonic, and ultrasonic alone. Postpolymerization was followed for 5 minutes. The cleaning efficiency, microcomputed tomography (µCT), surface roughness, Vickers hardness, and flexural strength of the specimens were evaluated. The 1-way ANOVA test was performed after considering normality. A post hoc analysis with Bonferroni was also performed (α=.008 or.005).
Results:
Ultrasonic in addition to cleaning solutions significantly improved the cleaning efficiency in NextDent C&B MFH specimens (P<.005), whereas ultrasonic did not affect the efficiency in DIOnavi-P. MAX specimens. No significant differences were found in surface roughness by postprinting cleaning methods in either NextDent C&B MFH or DIOnavi-P. MAX (P>.005). No significant changes in surface hardness were observed by postprinting cleaning methods (P>.008). In the NextDent C&B MFH, ethyl alcohol + ultrasonic significantly decreased the flexural strength (P<.005). There were no significant differences in the flexural strength in the DIOnavi-P. MAX (P>.005).
Conclusions:
Ethyl alcohol was comparable with isopropyl alcohol for use as a postprinting cleaning solution for both NextDent C&B MFH and DIOnavi-P. MAX. The addition of ultrasonic to cleaning solutions should be applied with caution. These findings suggest that different postprinting cleaning methods can be recommended depending on the 3D printed resin materials.
