Clinical Performance of 3D-Printed Provisional Dental Crowns

Recent advancements in additive manufacturing technology have introduced novel materials and fabrication techniques for provisional dental crowns, offering potential benefits for indirect crown fabrication in resource-limited environments, such as deployed military settings. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently cleared 3D-printed dental crown materials for provisionalization of prepared teeth; however, no clinical studies have been conducted to evaluate their performance. This study aimed to assess the short-term clinical performance of a 3D-printed provisional crown material (Temporary CB Resin, Formlabs) compared to a traditional direct provisional crown material (Integrity, Dentsply Sirona). Additionally, this study sought to explore the notional feasibility or proof of concept of incorporating additive manufacturing in deployed environments.

A crossover design was employed, in which each patient received both an indirect 3D-printed and a direct provisional crown on the same tooth. Qualitative assessments were performed using a modifiedFederation Dentaire Internationale (FDI) criteria for restorative materials at the time of placement and after a minimum of 2 months of wear. Quantitative wear analysis was conducted by superimposing baseline and 2-month digital scans using spatial analysis software.

At baseline, the 3D-printed provisional material exhibited significantly superior surface luster and anatomic form compared to the direct provisional material. After 2 months, the 3D-printed material demonstrated significantly better surface luster and periodontal response but showed increased fracture rates and loss of retention compared to the direct provisional material. No significant differences in volumetric wear were observed between the 2 materials.

The 3D-printed material, Temporary CB Resin, presents a viable alternative to the direct provisional material, Integrity. However, increased attention to occlusal adjustments and cementation techniques may be required to mitigate the risk of dislodgement and fracture, particularly for extended provisionalization periods. Additive manufacturing shows promise in deployed settings; however, significant workflow optimization is necessary for practical implementation.