Background/Objectives: Wettability is a key surface property of denture base resins and is related to denture retention through interfacial cohesive–adhesive forces; conversely, compromised material wettability facilitates bacterial adhesion and colonization. Although three-dimensional (3D) printing has become an increasingly popular method for fabricating dentures,
[...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Wettability is a key surface property of denture base resins and is related to denture retention through interfacial cohesive–adhesive forces; conversely, compromised material wettability facilitates bacterial adhesion and colonization. Although three-dimensional (3D) printing has become an increasingly popular method for fabricating dentures, there is insufficient evidence regarding the wettability of 3D-printed denture base resins. This study aims to evaluate the wettability of 3D-printed, heat-polymerized, and milled denture base resins by comparing their contact angles.
Methods: A search was conducted in MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, while grey literature was also assessed. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Quality Assessment Tool for In Vitro Studies (QUIN). Meta-analyses were conducted using inverse variance and the random effects model.
Results: A total of nine and seven studies were included in the quantitative synthesis comparing 3D-printed denture base resins with heat-polymerized and milled resins, respectively. A statistically significant difference of −6.50 degrees was observed in favor of 3D-printed denture base resins compared to heat-polymerized ones (95% CI: −12.11 to −0.90, I
2 = 99%), while the comparison between 3D-printed and milled resins showed a non-statistically significant mean difference (MD: 0.87, 95% CI: −5.08 to 6.82, I
2 = 98%).
Conclusions: The available in vitro evidence indicates that 3D-printed denture base resins tend to exhibit improved surface wettability compared with heat-polymerized resins and perform similarly to milled resins. However, given the extremely high heterogeneity, these findings should be interpreted with caution, as clinical performance depends on the complex interplay between surface characteristics and microbial adhesion rather than solely on wettability.
Full article
