RESUMO
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Three-dimensional (3D) printing enables the fast fabrication of definitive fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). However, data on the effects of surface treatments on their chemical and mechanical properties are lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to examine the influence of different surface treatments on a 3D printed resin in comparison with 2 veneering composite resins. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 288 specimens were manufactured from a 3D printed resin (VarseoSmile Crownplus) or veneering composite resins (GRADIA PLUS; VITA VM LC flow). Surfaces underwent varnishing, coating, polishing or remain untreated. Conversion rate (DC), surface roughness (SR), Martens parameter, flexural strength (FS), and 3-body wear (3BW) were determined (n=12). Statistical analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney-U, Kruskal-Wallis, and Spearman correlation tests (α=.05). RESULTS: After polishing, the 3D printed resin showed higher DC, SR, and 3BW but lower Martens parameters compared with veneering composite resins (P<.007). After goat hair brushing, the 3D printed resin showed lower FS than VITA-VCR (P=.043). For the 3D printed resin, goat hair brushing or GC-Varnish reduced SR, while VITA-Varnish showed the lowest 3BW (P<.045). For both veneering composite resins, goat hair brushing led to low SR and 3BW and high EIT and FS (P<.043). Silicone polishing led to low EIT of the 3D printed resin and low EIT and FS of GC-VCR (P<.009). Coating resulted in a lower EIT than the untreated surface and higher 3BW than GC-Varnish (P<.030). CONCLUSIONS: The 3D printed resin showed higher DC, SR, 3BW and lower HM, EIT, and FS values than the veneering composite resins. Polishing with a goat hair brush can be recommended for all tested materials. For the 3D printed resin, varnishing presents a promising alternative with regard to SR and 3BW. Silicone polishing and coating cannot be recommended.