Exploration of BioMat-X

Special Issue Topic

Innovations in Biomaterials for Dentistry and Oral Surgery

Submission Deadline: March 31, 2025

Guest Editor

Luca Fiorillo E-Mail

Research Fellow and Adjunct Professor of Prosthodontics at University of Messina, Messina, Italy.

Research Keywords: implant dentistry; prosthetics; dental implantology; bone regeneration; dental materials

About the Special Issue

This special issue explores the cutting-edge advancements in biomaterials shaping the landscape of dentistry and oral surgery. Novel biomaterials can revolutionize patient care, improve surgical outcomes, and enhance oral health. We welcome contributions that cover a broad spectrum of topics, including but not limited to dental implant materials, biocompatible prosthetics, tissue engineering, drug delivery systems, 3D printing applications, and clinical studies. Our goal is to provide a platform for researchers and practitioners to share their insights and innovations in the field of biomaterials for dentistry. This special issue is set to contribute to developing safer, more efficient, and patient-centric dental and oral surgical practices.

Keywords: biomaterials; dentistry; oral surgery; dental implants; tissue engineering; prosthetics; 3D printing; clinical applications

Call for Papers

Published Articles

Open Access

Original Article

Digital analysis of internal fit variation of additively manufactured crown patterns
Aim: The purpose of this study was to digitally quantify the consistency and variation of printed resin crown patterns produced by different 3D printers, aiming to evaluate their clinical relevan [...] Read more.

Aim:

The purpose of this study was to digitally quantify the consistency and variation of printed resin crown patterns produced by different 3D printers, aiming to evaluate their clinical relevance and accuracy. This was accomplished by evaluating patterns manufactured using three different 3D printers and resin materials, assessing their fit and adaptation through digital scanning and analysis. The objective was to determine the internal and marginal variations of printed crown resin patterns and to identify the printer and material combinations that produce the most consistent and clinically acceptable results.

Methods:

A prefabricated typodont tooth was prepared for a crown and scanned using an intraoral scanner. From this scan, a crown was designed and the resulting STL file was exported. This 3D file was manufactured using resins indicated for castable patterns on 3 different printers: FotoDent^®Cast with the Carbon M2 printer, Form 3 Castable with the Form 2 printer, and Siraya Tech Cast with the ELEGOO Mars 2 Pro 3D printer. Finally, the crown resin patterns were scanned using an intraoral digital scanner (3Shape TRIOS 3) scanner, and crown adaptation was digitally quantified in GeoMagic software. Clinically relevant significance was determined (marginal gap < 50 µm) between resin patterns printed on different printers.

Results:

Form 3 Castable/Form 2 printer had the lowest mean internal variation at all measurement areas, 21.07 μm at the occlusal, 104.23 μm at the margin, and 37.98 μm at the axial. FotoDent^® Cast/Carbon M2 had the largest marginal variation while Siraya Tech Cast/ELEGOO Mars 2 Pro had the largest occlusal variation. Within each material, the largest internal variation was at the marginal area while the lowest value was in the occlusal area.

Conclusions:

All printed crowns displayed clinically acceptable ranges, but there was a statistically significant difference in the fit between all printers.

Wendy A. Clark ... Ingeborg J. De Kok

Published: October 14, 2024 Explor BioMat-X. 2024;1:280–288
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/ebmx.2024.00020

Full Text

PDF

View:712

Download:24

Times Cited: 0

Aim:

The purpose of this study was to digitally quantify the consistency and variation of printed resin crown patterns produced by different 3D printers, aiming to evaluate their clinical relevance and accuracy. This was accomplished by evaluating patterns manufactured using three different 3D printers and resin materials, assessing their fit and adaptation through digital scanning and analysis. The objective was to determine the internal and marginal variations of printed crown resin patterns and to identify the printer and material combinations that produce the most consistent and clinically acceptable results.

Methods:

A prefabricated typodont tooth was prepared for a crown and scanned using an intraoral scanner. From this scan, a crown was designed and the resulting STL file was exported. This 3D file was manufactured using resins indicated for castable patterns on 3 different printers: FotoDent^®Cast with the Carbon M2 printer, Form 3 Castable with the Form 2 printer, and Siraya Tech Cast with the ELEGOO Mars 2 Pro 3D printer. Finally, the crown resin patterns were scanned using an intraoral digital scanner (3Shape TRIOS 3) scanner, and crown adaptation was digitally quantified in GeoMagic software. Clinically relevant significance was determined (marginal gap < 50 µm) between resin patterns printed on different printers.

Results:

Form 3 Castable/Form 2 printer had the lowest mean internal variation at all measurement areas, 21.07 μm at the occlusal, 104.23 μm at the margin, and 37.98 μm at the axial. FotoDent^® Cast/Carbon M2 had the largest marginal variation while Siraya Tech Cast/ELEGOO Mars 2 Pro had the largest occlusal variation. Within each material, the largest internal variation was at the marginal area while the lowest value was in the occlusal area.

Conclusions:

All printed crowns displayed clinically acceptable ranges, but there was a statistically significant difference in the fit between all printers.

Open Access

Editorial

Biomaterials in dentistry: the analogue/digital transition

Luca Fiorillo

Published: June 04, 2024 Explor BioMat-X. 2024;1:174–177
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/ebmx.2024.00012

Full Text

PDF

View:1386

Download:62

Times Cited: 0

Guest Editor

About the Special Issue

Call for Papers

Published Articles

Aim:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusions:

Aim:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusions: