Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage in Milled vs 3D-printed Polymethylmethacrylate Provisional Crowns Cemented with Eugenol and Noneugenol-based Cements: An Ex Vivo Study

Purpose: This study evaluated the microleakage resistance of milled and 3D-printed (3DP) polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) provisional crowns cemented with either eugenol-based or noneugenol-based cements. Materials and methods: Forty-eight extracted human molars were prepared for full coverage crowns, scanned, and standard tessellation language (STL) files were generated for crown fabrication. Milled and 3DP PMMA crowns were divided into four groups based on the cement type: group ME (milled with eugenol-based cement), group MN (milled with noneugenol cement), group PE (3DP with eugenol-based cement), and group PN (3DP with noneugenol cement). All samples underwent thermocycling, followed by immersion in methylene blue dye to evaluate microleakage. Microleakage scores were statistically analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney <i>U</i> tests with Bonferroni correction. Results: Significant differences were found across groups (<i>p</i> < 0.001), confirming that both crown fabrication method and cement type significantly influence microleakage resistance. Group PN showed the lowest microleakage (median score: 1, mean rank: 14.88), followed by MN (median score: 1, mean rank: 19.75), ME (median score: 2, mean rank: 30.42), and PE (median score: 2, mean rank: 32.96). <i>Post hoc</i> analysis indicated significantly lower microleakage for noneugenol cements compared to eugenol-based cements, especially in 3DP crowns. Conclusion: Noneugenol cements, particularly with 3DP crowns, demonstrated superior microleakage resistance, suggesting their suitability for longer-term provisional applications. Milled crowns generally showed better marginal adaptation than 3DP crowns, emphasizing the impact of both crown fabrication method and cement type on marginal seal integrity. How to cite this article: Sharda P, Shenoy AD, Nallaswamy D. Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage in Milled vs 3D-printed Polymethylmethacrylate Provisional Crowns Cemented with Eugenol and Noneugenol-based Cements: An <i>Ex Vivo</i> Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2024;14(4):250–254.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry
Published
2024-12-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1481
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Dental materials and restorations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.40
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage in Milled vs 3D-printed Polymethylmethacrylate Provisional Crowns Cemented with Eugenol and Noneugenol-based Cements: An Ex Vivo Study

Deepak Nallaswamy, Amrutha Shenoy, Pallav Sharda
1 citations
International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry
Dental materials and restorations
0.40
article

Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage in Milled vs 3D-printed Polymethylmethacrylate Provisional Crowns Cemented with Eugenol and Noneugenol-based Cements: An Ex Vivo Study

Deepak Nallaswamy, Amrutha Shenoy, Pallav Sharda
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Purpose: This study evaluated the microleakage resistance of milled and 3D-printed (3DP) polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) provisional crowns cemented with either eugenol-based or noneugenol-based cements. Materials and methods: Forty-eight extracted human molars were prepared for full coverage crowns, scanned, and standard tessellation language (STL) files were generated for crown fabrication. Milled and 3DP PMMA crowns were divided into four groups based on the cement type: group ME (milled with eugenol-based cement), group MN (milled with noneugenol cement), group PE (3DP with eugenol-based cement), and group PN (3DP with noneugenol cement). All samples underwent thermocycling, followed by immersion in methylene blue dye to evaluate microleakage. Microleakage scores were statistically analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney <i>U</i> tests with Bonferroni correction. Results: Significant differences were found across groups (<i>p</i> < 0.001), confirming that both crown fabrication method and cement type significantly influence microleakage resistance. Group PN showed the lowest microleakage (median score: 1, mean rank: 14.88), followed by MN (median score: 1, mean rank: 19.75), ME (median score: 2, mean rank: 30.42), and PE (median score: 2, mean rank: 32.96). <i>Post hoc</i> analysis indicated significantly lower microleakage for noneugenol cements compared to eugenol-based cements, especially in 3DP crowns. Conclusion: Noneugenol cements, particularly with 3DP crowns, demonstrated superior microleakage resistance, suggesting their suitability for longer-term provisional applications. Milled crowns generally showed better marginal adaptation than 3DP crowns, emphasizing the impact of both crown fabrication method and cement type on marginal seal integrity. How to cite this article: Sharda P, Shenoy AD, Nallaswamy D. Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage in Milled vs 3D-printed Polymethylmethacrylate Provisional Crowns Cemented with Eugenol and Noneugenol-based Cements: An <i>Ex Vivo</i> Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2024;14(4):250–254.

International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative DentistryVol. 14(4)
Saveetha University (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 38%
Dental materials and restorations
0.40
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.