Marginal Adaptation and Surface Roughness of Indirect Composite Veneers: A Comparative Study of 3D Printing and Conventional Techniques
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15218/edj.2025.34Keywords:
Indirect composite veneers, 3D printing, Conventional fabrication, Marginal fit, Surface roughnessAbstract
Background and Objectives: Indirect composite veneers in restorative dentistry depend on precise marginal fit and ideal surface roughness for long-term success. Marginal fit refers to how closely the edge of the veneer adapts to the tooth margin, where smaller gaps indicate better accuracy. Comparing 3D printing to conventional manufacturing techniques, the growing usage of digital technology may result in improvements in surface quality and accuracy. This study aimed to evaluate how traditional methods compare with 3D printing in terms of the fit and surface texture of indirect composite veneers.
Materials and Method: Twenty extracted human teeth were used for the marginal fitness test and twenty composite discs for the surface roughness test in this in vitro study. Each set was divided into two groups (n=10 per group): One group for 3D printed composite veneers and the other for conventional indirect composite veneers. For marginal fit, the extracted teeth were prepared and ten veneers were fabricated for each group, and a stereomicroscope was used to measure the vertical marginal gaps at twelve reference points per each fabricated veneer. To measure surface roughness, disc-shaped specimens per group were fabricated. A contact profilometer was used to measure surface roughness both before and after polishing.
Results: Both groups' marginal gaps fell into clinically acceptable limits. With a mean gap of 56.07 µm for the 3D-printed group and 59.61 µm for the conventional group, the difference in marginal gaps between the two groups was not statistically significant, indicating that both methods provided similar results (p = 0.457). Surface roughness was significantly reduced in both groups after polishing (p < 0.0001). The 3D-printed group demonstrated superior surface characteristics, showing significantly lower roughness values both before polishing (p = 0.039) and after polishing (p < 0.0001).
Conclusion: Indirect techniques for fabrication of veneers from 3D printed composite can provide clinically acceptable marginal fit, and smoother surface than traditional composite. These results support the potential of using 3D printing to create indirect composite veneers.
References
Machado AN, Coelho-de-Souza FH, Rolla JN, Erhardt MCG, Demarco FF. Direct or indirect composite veneers in anterior teeth: which method causes higher tooth mass loss? An in vitro study. Gen Dent. 2014;62(6):55–7.
Corbani K, Hardan L, Eid R, Skienhe H, Alharbi N, Ozcan M, et al. Fracture Resistance of Three-unit Fixed Dental Prostheses Fabricated with Milled and 3D Printed Composite-based Materials. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2021 1;22(9):985–90.
Corbani K, Hardan L, Skienhe H, Özcan M, Alharbi N, Salameh Z. Effect of material thickness on the fracture resistance and failure pattern of 3D-printed composite crowns. Int J Comput Dent. 2020;23(3):225–33.
Dolev E, Bitterman Y, Meirowitz A. Comparison of marginal fit between CAD-CAM and hot-press lithium disilicate crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2019 ;121(1):124–8.
Falahchai M, Rahimabadi S, Khabazkar G, Hemmati Y, Neshandar Asli H. Marginal and internal fit and fracture resistance of three‐unit provisional restorations fabricated by additive, subtractive, and conventional methods. Clinical and Experimental Dental Research. 2022 24;8.
Badami V, Satya Priya M, Vijay L, Kethineni H, Akarapu S, Agarwal S. Marginal Adaptation of Veneers: A Systematic Review. Cureus. 2022;14(11):e31885.
O’Brien WJ. Dental materials and their selection [Internet]. 4th ed. Hanover Park, IL: Quintessence Pub. Co.; 2008 [cited 2024 Nov 28]. 425 p. Available from: http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/toc/ecip0815/2008014998.html
Cramer NB, Stansbury JW, Bowman CN. Recent Advances and Developments in Composite Dental Restorative Materials. Journal of Dental Research. 2011 ;90(4):402.
Farag SM, Ghoneim MM, Afifi RR. Effect of Die Spacer Thickness on the Microshear Bond Strength of CAD/CAM Lithium Disilicate Veneers. International Journal of Dentistry. 2021;2021(1):4593131.
Gresnigt MMM, Cune MS, Jansen K, van der Made S a. M, Özcan M. Randomized clinical trial on indirect resin composite and ceramic laminate veneers: Up to 10-year findings. J Dent. 2019 ;86:102–9.
Nazar A, Munir M, Rafiq A, Khalid S, Hassan H. Success of Veneers with Indirect Resin Composite. Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences. 2021 1;15:3619–22.
Ortensi L, Vitali T, Ortensi M, Lavorgna L, Strocchi ML. Customized composite veneers from a totally digital workflow: A case report. Clinical Case Reports. 2020;8(11):2172–80.
Marques S, Ribeiro P, Gama C, Herrero-Climent M. Digital guided veneer preparation: A dental technique. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2024 1;131(4):554–9.
Elrashid AH, AlKahtani AH, Alqahtani SJ, Alajmi NB, Alsultan FH. Stereomicroscopic Evaluation of Marginal Fit of E.Max Press and E.Max Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Assisted Manufacturing Lithium Disilicate Ceramic Crowns: An In vitro Study. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2019;9(2):178–84.
Nasir M, Kadhim A. Marginal adaptation of different monolithic zirconia crowns with horizontal and vertical finish lines: A comparative in vitro study. Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects. 2023 30;17:235–41.
Magdy NM, Kola MZ, Alqahtani HH, Alqahtani MD, Alghmlas AS. Evaluation of Surface Roughness of Different Direct Resin-based Composites. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2017;7(3):104–9.
Hanoon ZA, Abdullah HA, Al-Ibraheemi ZA, Alamoush RA, Sami SM, Haider J. Marginal Fit of Porcelain Laminate Veneer Materials under Thermocycling Condition: An In-Vitro Study. Dentistry Journal. 2023 Jan;11(1):12.
Alharbi N, Alharbi S, Cuijpers VMJI, Osman RB, Wismeijer D. Three-dimensional evaluation of marginal and internal fit of 3D-printed interim restorations fabricated on different finish line designs. Journal of Prosthodontic Research. 2018 Apr 1;62(2):218–26.
Daghrery A, Lunkad H, Mobarki K, Alhazmi M, Khubrani H, Vinothkumar TS, et al. Marginal Discrepancy and Internal Fit of 3D-Printed Versus Milled Laminate Veneers: An In Vitro Study. Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2024 Nov;15(11):338.
Pott P, Rzasa A, Stiesch M, Eisenburger M. Marginal fit of indirect composite inlays using a new system for manual fabrication. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2016 Sep;17(3):223–6.
Karaoğlanoğlu S, Aydın N, Oktay EA, Ersöz B. Comparison of the Surface Properties of 3D-printed Permanent Restorative Resins and Resin-based CAD/CAM Blocks. Oper Dent. 2023 Sep 1;48(5):588–98.
Vinagre A, Barros C, Gonçalves J, Messias A, Oliveira F, Ramos J. Surface Roughness Evaluation of Resin Composites after Finishing and Polishing Using 3D-Profilometry. International Journal of Dentistry. 2023 Nov 14;2023:1–12.
Erturk-Avunduk AT, Atılan-Yavuz S, Filiz H, Cengiz-Yanardag E. A comparative study of polishing systems on optical properties and surface roughness of additively manufactured and conventional resin based composites. Sci Rep. 2024 Oct 27;14(1):25658.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ranoo Hunar Abdullatif, Hoshang Khalid Abdel-Rhman (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The copyright on any article published in Erbil Dental Journal is retained by the author(s) in agreement with the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial ShareAlike License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).
