Skip to content
Open access

Effect of post-polymerization exposure times and material thickness on color stability of 3D-printed definitive restoration resins: An in vitro study.

Sep 2026 · Journal of Prosthodontics · 0 citations · 65 references
Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to investigate the effect of post-polymerization exposure time and material thickness on the color stability of three-dimensional (3D)-printed definitive restoration resins with varying filler compositions.

Materials And Methods

Three A1-shaded definitive restoration resins, VarseoSmile Crown Plus (R1), saremco print CROWNTEC (R2), and P-Crown V3 Ceramic (R3), were evaluated. Disk-shaped specimens (8 × 2 mm, 8 × 4 mm) were 3D-printed under controlled conditions. Subsequently, each material thickness group was divided into four subgroups (n = 15) representing post-polymerization exposure times of 0, 2000, 4000, and 6000 flashes using a post-curing device (Otoflash; NK Optik GmbH). Color coordinates were measured using a spectrophotometer, and color differences (ΔE00) were calculated using the CIEDE2000 formula. The Vita 3D Master 1M2 shade was used as the control reference. Data were analyzed using three-way analysis of variance and Tukey's test (α = 0.05).

Results

All tested resins exhibited color changes exceeding the clinical acceptability threshold (ΔE00 > 2.25), with color deviations recorded for R1 (ΔE00 = 3.43-6.79), R2 (ΔE00 = 3.54-6.45), and R3 (ΔE00 = 7.30-12.14). Among the post-polymerized specimens, R2 at 4 mm thickness with 6000 flashes post-polymerization achieved the best color fidelity (ΔE00 = 3.54 ± 0.31). Notably, the manufacturer-recommended 4000-flash protocol produced the greatest overall color deviation. Resin type (partial η2 = 0.940), post-polymerization exposure time (partial η2 = 0.733), and material thickness (partial η2 = 0.089) significantly affected color stability (p ≤ 0.001). Overall color fidelity ranked as R2 (mean ΔE00 = 5.07), followed by R1 (mean ΔE00 = 5.60), and R3 (mean ΔE00 = 9.55).

Conclusions

Manufacturer shade designations alone are insufficient for predicting the final color of 3D-printed resins. Post-fabrication shade verification is essential, as the final color deviates significantly depending on the material and post-polymerization protocol. The optical properties of additively manufactured definitive restorations may deviate from standard shade references to a clinically unacceptable level depending on material thickness and post-polymerization protocols. Relying exclusively on manufacturers' nominal shade codes or recommended curing protocols could result in esthetic mismatches.

Read PDF

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.