Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 10, 2026
Stereolithographic 3D Printing with Renewable Acrylates
Published on: September 12, 2018
Comparative LC-MS analysis of monomer composition and elution from provisional and permanent 3D-printed dental resins
Wisarut Prawatvatchara1, Narin Intarak2, Sermporn Thaweesapphithak2
1Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
Objectives:
This study aimed to comparatively characterize the chemical composition of four commercial 3D-printed resin composites and quantify residual monomer elution profiles relevant to provisional and permanent fixed restorations.
Methods:
Two provisional resins (Temporary CB, Formlabs and NextDent C&B MFH) and two permanent 3D-printed resins (Saremco print CrownTec and VarseoSmile Crown plus) were analyzed. Unpolymerized resins underwent untargeted liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) for compositional screening. Polymerized specimens were immersed in artificial saliva (37 °C, 72 h), followed by targeted quantitative LC-MS to quantify eluted residual monomers using certified standards calibration curves for HEMA, TEGDMA, UDMA, and Bis-EMA.
Results:
Untargeted analysis detected 4125 chemical features, refined to 39 high-confidence resin-derived compounds across four 3D-printed resin composites. These were mainly monomers and derivatives, with some photoinitiators and additives. Compound diversity varied by material, with permanent Saremco and VarseoSmile showing the greatest variety. Bis-EMA predominated in Temporary CB, Saremco, and VarseoSmile, while UDMA was most abundant in NextDent, Saremco, and VarseoSmile. Quantitative analysis of monomer elution revealed that Temporary CB and VarseoSmile released the highest levels of Bis-EMA, NextDent showed the greatest elution of HEMA and UDMA, and VarseoSmile had the highest TEGDMA release. Saremco generally exhibited the lowest concentrations of all monitored monomers. These results demonstrate substantial variability in both composition and monomer elution profiles among commercial 3D-printed dental resins.
Conclusions:
Chemical composition and monomer elution in 3D-printed dental resins are highly material-specific. The marked variability, especially among permanent crown resins, underscores the need for material-specific biocompatibility testing to ensure long-term clinical safety.
Clinical Significance:
Material-specific differences in monomer elutions from 3D-printed dental resins may affect patient safety and restoration durability, underscoring the need for careful material selection and targeted biocompatibility testing in clinical practice.
