1

3D and 4D printing in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery: Recent advances and future

perspectives

Danial Khorsandi1,2,3, Amir Fahimipour4, Payam Abasian5, Sepehr Sadeghpour Saber6, Mahla

Seyedi7, Sonia Ghanavati8, Amir Ahmad6, Andrea Amoretti De Stephanis6, Fatemeh

Taghavinezhad6, Anna Leonova9, Reza Mohammadinejad10, Majid Shabani11,12, Barbara

Mazzolai11, Virgilio Mattoli11, Franklin R. Tay13*, Pooyan Makvandi11*

1Department of Biotechnology-Biomedicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona 08028, Spain 2Department of Mechanical engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8,

Canada 3Department of Medical and Scientific Affair, Procare Health Iberia, Barcelona 08860, Spain

4Discipline of Oral Surgery, Medicine and Diagnostics, School of Dentistry, Faculty of

Medicine and Health, Westmead Centre for Oral Health, The University of Sydney, NSW

2145, Australia

5Department of Chemical Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran

6International University of Catalunya, Faculty of Dentistry, Sant Cugat, Barcelona 08195,

Spain

7Department of Engineering, Corrosion and Metallurgy Study Center “A. Dacco”, University

of Ferrara, Ferrara 44121, Italy

8Department of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University of technology,

Tampere 33720, Finland

9Department of Medical Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton L8S 4L8, ON, Canada

10Research Center for Tropical and Infectious Diseases, Kerman University of Medical

Sciences, Kerman 76169-13555, Iran

11Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Centre for Micro-BioRobotics, viale Rinaldo Piaggio 34,

56025 Pontedera, Pisa, Italy

12 The BioRobotics Institute, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, viale Rinaldo Piaggio 34, 56025

Pontedera, Pisa, Italy

13The Graduate School, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia 30912, United States

Corresponding authors:

Email: ftay@augusta.edu (F. Tay); Pooyan.makvandi@iit.it (P. Makvandi)

2

Abstract

3D and 4D printing are cutting-edge technologies for precise and expedited manufacturing of

objects ranging from plastic to metal. Recent advances in 3D and 4D printing technologies in

dentistry and maxillofacial surgery enable dentists to custom design and print surgical drill

guides, temporary and permanent crowns and bridges, orthodontic appliances and orthotics,

implants, mouthguards for drug delivery. In the present review, different 3D printing

technologies available for use in dentistry are highlighted together with a critique on the

materials available for printing. Recent reports of the application of these printed platformed

are highlighted to enable readers appreciate the progress in 3D/4D printing in dentistry.

Keywords: 3D printing; 4D printing; dental applications; dental devices; dentistry;

maxillofacial surgery

3

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 6

2. 3D printing techniques ....................................................................................................... 9

2.1 Stereolithography ........................................................................................................ 9

2.2 Digital light projection ................................................................................................... 10

2.3 Fused deposition modeling ............................................................................................ 12

2.4 Selective laser sintering ................................................................................................. 13

2.5 Photopolymer Jetting................................................................................................. 15

2.6 Powder Binder Printer ............................................................................................... 16

2.7 Computed axial lithography ........................................................................................... 17

3. Materials employed for 3D/4D printing in dentistry ...................................................... 19

3.1 Polymers ........................................................................................................................ 19

3.1.1 Vinyl polymers ........................................................................................................ 19

3.1.2 Styrene polymers ..................................................................................................... 20

3.1.3 Polyesters ................................................................................................................ 21

3.2 Metal-based materials ............................................................................................... 22

3.2.1 Stainless steel alloys ............................................................................................... 22

3.2.2 Titanium and its alloys ............................................................................................ 23

3.2.3 Cobalt-based alloys ................................................................................................ 23

3.3 Ceramics ........................................................................................................................ 25

3.3.1 Zirconia ................................................................................................................... 26

3.3.2 Alumina ................................................................................................................... 27

3.4 Responsive materials for 4D printing........................................................................ 27

3.5 Materials Safty .......................................................................................................... 29

4. Applications ......................................................................................................................... 30

4.1. Dentures ........................................................................................................................ 33

4.2. Crowns and bridges ................................................................................................... 34

4.3. Orthodontic appliances and orthotics............................................................................ 35

4.4. Oral and maxillofacial surgery .................................................................................. 36

4.4 3D printing of metals in dentistry ............................................................................. 38

4.4. Hard and soft tissue engineering ............................................................................... 39

4.5. Mouthguards for drug delivery ..................................................................................... 41

4.6. 3D printing in endodontics ........................................................................................ 42

4

4.7. 3D printing application in dental education .............................................................. 43

5. 4D printing in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery: Challenges and future perspectives .... 43

6. Conclusion and outlook ................................................................................................... 45

5

Abbreviations

2,2´-azo-bis-isobutyrylnitrile (AIBN); Acrylonitrile butyrostyrene (ABS); Acrylonitrile

butyrostyrene (ABS); Additive manufacturing (AM); Alumina toughened zirconia (ATZ);

Alumina trihydrate (ATH); Aluminium (Al2O3); Ceria-stabilized zirconia (12Ce-TZP);

Chromium oxide (Cr2O3); Cobalt chromium molybdenum (CoCrMo); Commercially pure

titanium (CP-Ti); Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT); Controlled radical

polymerization (CRP); Digital light projection (DLP); Digital micromirror device (MDM);

Energy dispersive X-Ray (EDX); Fused deposition modeling (FDM); Fused filament

fabrication (FFF); Free radical polymerization (FRP); Hexagonal close-packed (HCP);

Magnesium oxide (MgO); n-butyllithium (n-BuLi); Polylactic acid (PLA); Poly(methyl

methacrylate) (PMMA); Polycaprolactone (PCL); Polycarbonate (PC); Polyetheretherketone

(PEEK); Polystyrene (PS); Polyvinylsiloxane (PVS); Rapid prototyping (RP); Scanning

electron microscopy (SEM); Selective laser sintering (SLS); Stereolithography (SL);

Stereolithography apparatus (SLA); Temporomandibular joint (TMJ); Titanium dioxide

(TiO2); Ultraviolet (UV); Zirconia-toughened alumina (ZTA); Zirconium oxide (ZrO2)

6

1. Introduction

Three dimensional (3D) printing is an industrial technology that has rapidly evolved over

its forty-year history [1]. This additive manufacturing (AM) approach differs from classical

subtractive manufacturing principles and is currently utilized in a plethora of disciplines

ranging from aerospace industries to personalized medicine and dentistry. This manufacturing

scheme enables rapid creation of custom-based complex parts, made it an applicable solution

in developing self-growing robots [2]. Additive manufacturing is represented by technologies

such as stereolithography, fused deposition modeling, selective laser sintering, inkjet printing,

photopolymer jetting and powder binder printing [3–8]. Different materials, e.g., polymers,

composites, ceramics, and metal alloys, are employed for additive manufacturing [9,10].

Integration of 3D printing into different facets of contemporary dentistry has enabled the

production of complex prosthodontic, orthodontic and surgical devices that demand flexibility

and abrasion resistance from the molding materials.

Recent progress in 3D-printable smart materials has brought into fruition a newer

generation of “dimensional printing” that is coined 4D printing. Four-dimensional printing is

the combination of 3D printing with time as the 4th dimension [11]. Such a printing platform

produces pre-programable bio-objects that change their shape in response to the surrounding

media [12].

Companies are taking advantage of recent expiration of the initial patents to introduce and

expand their technologies (Figure 1). In light of 3D and 4D printing rapidly becoming a

manufacturing and prototyping alternative in dentistry, the objective of the present review is to

explore, explain and compare the different 3D printing technologies that have been utilized for

the fabrication of dental biomaterials. Applications of these 3D printed platforms will also be

described to enable readers appreciate the progress achieved in this rapidly developing field.

7

Table 1. Advantages and disadvantages of 3D/4D printing methods in dentistry.

3D/ 4D printing

system

Material

characteristics

Materials Advantages Disadvantages Ref.

Stereolithography

(SLA)

Light curable

resin

Epoxy and

methacrylate

monomers

- Product resolution

- Efficiency

- Short working time

- Over-curing

- Lack of surface smoothness

- Limited mechanical strength

- Irritant

[13–

16]

Selective laser

sintering (SLS)

Powder - Polymers

- Ceramics

- Metals

- Structures are fully self-supporting

- Protective gas in not needed

- Vast variety of materials can be selected

- Little to no thermal stresses are accumulated

on the component

- Components exhibit excellent mechanical

properties

- Relatively fast method

- Sample surfaces appear porous and rough

- Harmful gases release during fabrication

- Materials waste is relatively high

- Raw powders are expensive to an extent

- Post-processing is often expensive and

tedious

[17–

20]

Fused deposition

modeling (FDM)

Thermoplastic

polymer and

composites,

low melting

temperature

metal alloys

- Paste

- Wire

- Filaments are cheap and arrive in various

colors

- Easy to change materials

- Cost-effective maintenance

- Capable of fast production of shelled

structures

- Fundamental for thinner layers up to 0.1 mm

thick

- Released fumes are not toxic

- The seam between layers is visible

- Discontinuous extrusion results in formation

of defects

- Support structure is required in some cases

- Delamination between layers may occur

due to low extrusion temperature

- Printed component may curl off the build

platform because of induced thermal stresses

[9,21–

25]

Photopolymer

jetting

Light curable

resin

- Biocompatible

(MED610)

- VeroDentPlus

(MED690) and

VeroDent

(MED670)( all are

natural looking

medically -

approved

photopolymers)

- High resolution due to thin layer printing

(~16 microns per layer)

- Short working time

- Excellent surface features

- No need for post-modification

- Supporting wide range of materials

- Irritant

- High cost

[26–

32]

8

Powder binders Materials which

are available in

powder

- Metal

- Ceramic

- Plastics

- Safe material

- Short working time

- Suitable mechanical performance

- Low cost

- Low resolution

- Low strength

- Cannot be soaked/heat sterilized

[33,34]

Digital light

projection

Light curable

resin

- Resin - High complexity and excellent surface

finish

- Short timeframe

- Good accuracy

- Smooth surfaces

- Limited material selection

- Photocurable resin can cause skin

sensitization, and maybe irritant by contact

[35]

Computed axial

lithography

Light curable

resin

- Resin containing

dissolved oxygen

- It can be used in specific conditions where

existing methods fall short, such as:

. Printing soft materials that cannot maintain

the forces applied during layerwise printing,

. Creating lenses with smooth curved

surfaces,

. Encapsulating other objects in three

dimensions

- Limited material selection [36,37]

9

Figure 1. Current 3D and/or 4D printing techniques used in dentistry.

2. 3D printing techniques

2.1 Stereolithography

Stereolithography (SLA) is the first commercially available 3D printing technology.

This rapid manufacturing method involves photoinduced polymerization to create layered

structures using highly cross-linked polymers[38]. This technology may be subdivided into

different categories based on the type of platform motion and laser movement. Irrespective

of these categories, printing proceeds through three major steps: light/laser exposure,

platform movement, and resin refilling. Stereolithography is the typical representative of

AM, which utilizes layer-by-layer modeling. A 3D digitized model, which is used as the

template for the fabrication process, guides the SLA machinery to complete the printed

object. The layers are bound together bottom-up upon exposure of the resin to ultraviolet

light, which induces free radical polymerization (FRP) of the resin monomers. As one layer

is polymerized, the resin platform lowers by a distance equal to the thickness of one layer

and builds the next layer until the printing of the digitized 3D object is completed (Figure

10

2A and B) [39]. The discontinued manner of processing can be overcome by combining SLA

with continuous liquid interface production. The latter a proprietary method of 3D printing

that uses photopolymerization to create smooth-sided solid objects [25,40] Variables such

as light source intensity, scanning speed as well as the amount of resin monomers and

photoinitiators may be controlled to achieve the required modeling kinetics and properties

of the final product [31]. Currently, SLA is applied in the manufacturing of temporary and

permanent crowns and bridges, temporary restorations, surgical guides, templates, and

dental model replicas (Figure 2B) [26]. Table 1 represents the pros and cons of 3D/4D

printing methods in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery.

Stereolithography accommodates flexibility in design, geometric shape and scaling,

resulting in highly accurate personalized devices. High precision measurements retrieved

from the patient’s scanning data enable production of reliable appliances for long-term use

[41]. However, cytotoxicity of the printed appliances may be caused by the leaching of

residual unreacted resin monomers from the printed appliances. The may affect the

longevity of the appliances.

Stereolithography demonstrated greater clinical accuracy than other digital/analog

methods in the production of dental stone casts; the 3D printing technique represents an

acceptable alternative for diagnosis, treatment, and production of prosthetic devices [42].

Nevertheless, SLA-printed dental devices suffer from poor mechanical properties caused by

the limited choice of resins that can be photopolymerized [39]. Nanoparticle incorporation

into the polymeric matrix improves mechanical properties [43]. Other coupling agents such

as ceramic fillers protect the printed structure from fracture by improving stress distribution.

Antimicrobial agents have also been incorporated into the resins to address the issue of

microbial colonization of oral devices [14,44]. Overall, SLA is a rapid, convenient and

multifunctional technique in 3D dental printing (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Stereolithography printing. (A) Layer by layer printing process. (B) An example of a crown printed

with stereolithography prior to removal of supports and polishing.

2.2 Digital light projection

11

DLP is a photocuring technology which is similar to SLA process. The materials are liquid

photosensitive resins which undergo photocuring and subsequently form the 3D printed part

layer by layer. The first layer is formed on the build platform. Based on the position of the

UV source, the build platform may be ascending or descending as shown in Figure 3B [45].

Next layers will be formed on their previous layers. DLP 3D printer utilizes a digital

projector screen to flash the current layer’s image, through a transparent bottom/top of the

resin tank, across the build platform or previous layer. After curing each layer, the build

platform goes up/down as the thickness of a layer until completing the entire part [46,47]. A

digital micromirror device (MDM) is used to reflect the light. DMD consists of a matrix of

microscopic-size mirrors. These mirrors conduct the light from the laser projector to the

projection lens. They make different configurations, adjustable for each layer, such that they

create the 2D sketch of the layer by light on the curing surface [48].

Although SLA and DPL are very similar, they also have some differences. The main

difference is the light source. SLA benefits from UV laser beam while DLP uses UV light

from the projection source. Consequently, in SLA laser beam moves from point to point and

cures the resin from point to point while in DLP the light source is stationary and cures each

layer of the resin at a time. These different curing processes result in more accurate and

better quality in SLA compared to DLP, while on the other hand improves the printing speed

in DLP method. The intensity of the light source in the DLP 3D printer is adjustable while

it is not adjustable in the SLA printer. This means that the operator can control the effect of

light on the resin. In summary, DLP is advantageous in the fast printing of bigger parts with

fewer details while SLA is advantageous in printing accurate parts with intricate details [49–

53].

12

Figure 3. Digital light projection (DLP). (A) Schematic of the printer components and printing procedure.

Reprinnted with permission from [49]. (B) Demonstration of two kinds of platform movements in DLP method

[54].

2.3 Fused deposition modeling

Fused deposition modeling (FDM), also known as fused filament fabrication (FFF), is

the trade name for a polymer, composites, or metal alloys softening process that was invented

over 20 years ago. It is the second most commonly used 3D printing technique, after SLA

[55]. This method is remarkably cheaper than the other AM techniques [56]. The basis of

this technique is the principle of strand extrusion: the desired type of thermoplastic materials,

shaped as strands, is delivered to the extruder. Upon softening, the heated viscous plastic is

deposited by an extrusion head that results in layer-by-layer fabrication of the digitized

model (Figure 4A) [57,58]. Unlike SLA, individual layers within the object have reduced

bonding and thus, the final product has greater anisotropy [25]. Thermoplastic polymers and

their composites (e.g., acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS), polycarbonates and

polysulfones) along with low melting temperature metal alloys (e.g., bronze metal filament)

are the most common employed FDM filaments [9,56]. Polymers may be filled with metal

(nano)particle reinforcement to prepare (nano)composite filament to improve different

features, e.g., thermal resistance and mechanical properties. Mechanical properties in the

13

FDM method can be affected by three main groups of parameters: print material, structural

parameters (i.e. rasters angle, infill density, print orientation, and stacking sequence), and

manufacturing parameters (i.e. extrusion temperature and rate, layer time, nozzle transverse

speed, and bed temperature) [56]. Because of the weak mechanical properties of these

unfilled thermoplastics, FDM is used only for the printing of temporary crowns and bridges

in dentistry. Similarly to SLA, processing commences with the acquisition of computer-

aided design (CAD) images, as depicted in Figure 4B. Based on these digitized images,

FDM is capable of rapid printing of the destined product (Figure 4C).

Fused deposition modeling is the technology utilized in most low-cost ‘home’ 3D

printers. It enables the printing of crude anatomical models without too much complexity.

Although the final product is brittle and contains rough surfaces, FDM is cheaper than other

3D printing techniques. This technique is used in machines with low maintenance and in

scientific research [55].

Figure 4. Fused deposition modeling (FDM). (A) FDM printer. (B) dental crown CAD file. (C) dental crown

FDM. Reprinted with permission from [59].

2.4 Selective laser sintering

Selective laser sintering (SLS) is a system wherein a high energy beam laser is used to

induce fusion of the powdered raw material. The laser creates a solid layer out of the powder,

The platform will be lowered to make space for the laser to sinter the next layer of powder.

This method of structure creation does not require additional material support during printing

because support is provided by the powder surrounding it [60].

14

Multi-purpose study models, guides for drilling and cutting as well as metal frameworks

can be created using SLS (Figure 5). The advantages of SLS include the use of autoclavable

materials, mechanical functionality of the printed object, reduction in production cost with

increase in production volume. The disadvantages of this printing technique are the health

risk associated with inhalation of the powdered raw material, the initial high cost in setting

up and the need for supplementary supplies such as compressed air for proper functioning

of SLS [17,19,20]. The function of the laser is to increase the temperature of the powder to

close to, but not its sintering point. This sintering process converts the solid power into a

semi-liquid state. The platform on which the first layer rests lowers by ~0.1 mm, giving the

laser space for a new layer of powder to be sintered. This stepwise sintering and fusion

continue until the object is fully printed. The object is left to cool down after printing is

complete [19].

Another benefit of SLS is the almost utilization readiness of the printed object. Whereas

other printer methods necessitate an extra sanding step or other forms of finishing before the

printed products are usable, this step is usually not mandatory for the SLS technique.

Because SLS printers do not require structural support during printing, the processing time

is considerably faster compared with SLA and FDM [61–63]. Three types of SLS printing

are available: metal-based, ceramic-based, and polymer-based SLS. The metal-based SLS

technique utilizes fine metal powders, whereas the polymer-based SLS technique utilizes

fine-grained thermoplastic polymers as raw materials. For metal-based SLS, different metal

powders may be employed, such as stainless steel alloys (316, 304L, 309, 174), and titanium

alloy (6AI-4V). Unlike polymer-based SLS which does not require gas injection, metal-

based SLS requires protective gas to be flooded into the printing chamber to avoid oxidation

of the metal powder when the latter is heated to a high sintering temperature.

Figure 5. Selective laser sintering (SLS). (A) illustrations of the design and fabrication of a removable partial

denture (RPD) framework by SLS. (B) CAD design of RPD framework, (C) the final RPD framework, (D)

15

laser-sintered metal frame, (E) partial denture fabricated using the sintered framework. Reprinted with

permission from [64].

In addition, SLS technique has been employed for fabricating ceramic parts [65]. Since

ceramic powders need appropriate exposure time to result in the desired density, the target

temperature should be lowered to facilitate the densification. One solution is mixing other

materials such as organic (e.g., polymers) or inorganic (e.g., metal-based low-melting

materials and glass) compounds, as binders in the ceramic powder. Therefore, binders melt

in the heated powder bed surface and creat a bonding glassy phase around the ceramic

particles. Besides, these binders are more sturdy to temperature variations. To prevent the

oxidation of the binder contents, insert atmospheres is mandatory. Organic contents can be

removed in the high-temperature firing in furnace, while the inorganic parts remain [66].

Infiltration/isostatic pressing along with SLS enhances the mechanical performance of the

ceramic parts by maximizing the final density [67]. However, there are several challenges in

the fabrication of ceramic parts with optimal mechanical performances. Powder deposition,

the interaction between laser and powder, mechanism of melting and consolidation, as well

as thermal and residual stress analysis are some of these challenges [68].

2.5 Photopolymer Jetting

This technology involves the combination of two techniques, using a dynamic printing

head and photopolymerizable polymer. The light-sensitive polymer is jetted to a building

platform from an inkjet-type printing head and cured layer by layer on the descending

platform (Figure 6) [69]. A supporting structure is also printed using fragile support material

for easy removal. This technology enables printing of an extensive range of resins and waxes

for casting. Silicone-like rubber materials may also be used for printing complex and highly-

detailed products with a resolution of ~16 microns. The printed products may be used as

crowns or anatomical study models. Another advantage of the printing technique is that

implant drill guides may be printed rapidly and economically with better quality. 3D jet

printers utilize multiple printing heads to cover the working platform width [27,30].

16

Figure 6. (A) Photopolymer jetting. (B) Temporary crowns fabricated with the photopolymer jetting method.

Micrographs of the cross-sections of the temporary crown (C) Margin. (D) Axial. (C) Cusp. (D) Fossa.

(Magnification ×50). Reprinted with permission from [27].

The printing head and working platform move bidirectionally but independently. An

ultraviolet light source is used to harden each layer of resin or wax that has been jetted. The

advantages of this technology are rapid manufacturing, surface smoothness and cost

efficacy. The drawbacks include difficulty in removing the material completely due to rigid

support, skin irritation, inability to be heat-sterilized and the high cost of the material [25,26].

2.6 Powder Binder Printer

This AM process uses liquid adhesive droplets within a modified inkjet head. The inkjet

head releases these droplets for infiltrating a layer of powder located underneath. This step

is repeated by replenishing a new layer of powder until the final product is manufactured.

The main application of powder binder printing in dentistry is in the printing of study casts

or prototypes. However, the printed objects are fragile and lacked accuracy. Because this is

low-cost technology, the technique finds use in applications that do not require sterilization,

17

such as printing of study casts. However, the manufacturing process is messy because of the

use of powder (Figure 6) [70].

Figure 7. (A) Powder binder printing. (B) A 3D printed denture model. (C) Scanning electron micrograph of

the powder used for printing. (D) Distribution in particle size of the powder employed for printing. Reprinted

with permission from [71].

2.7 Computed axial lithography

There is intense interest in the adaptation of novel technologies for 3D/4D printing in

dentistry. Volumetric AM is an example of these newly developed systems. Computed axial

lithography is a form of volumetric AM printing technique. It has some similarity to DLP

method as both systesm employ projector as light source to photopolymerize the resin. The

difference between computed axial lithography and other conventional printing technqiues

is that light polymerization is applied at several angles to the material, where as other AM

printing methods utilize layer-by-layer polymerization. In other words, computed axial

lithography can produce the entire object at once (not layer by layer). The idea of computed

axial lithography is inspired by computed tomography scanners. In computed tomography,

X-ray scanning is performed from many different angles. This concept was utilized in the

development of computed axial lithography [35]. The object is fabricated by projecting a

light (with specific wavelength) containing many 2D pictures (from different angles of the

18

object) to a rotating container of photocurable resin (Figure 8). Photopolymerization of the

resin material permits manufacturing of products with higher complexity and better surface

finish in shorter timeframe, compared with other AM methods. Centimeter-scaled products

may be printed within a minute with the use of computed axial lithography. The products

printed with this technique can be easily designed with CAD and saved in stereolithography

file format. To date, high viscosity resins or solid materials are used predominantly for this

technique. The application of materials with low viscosity may permit prining of tissues in

the future. However, more in vivo studies are required to investigate the mechanical and

chemical properties, tolerability and biocompatibility of the photopolymerized resin

products prior to their recommendation for clinical applications [35,72].

Figure 8. Schematic of scanning (I) and then printing (II) using computed axial lithography as

volumetric additive manufacturing. A 3D model is initially prepared using scanners (I). The 3D

model is converted into many 2D images. Each image is projected in one angle to the rotating

container. DLP: digital light processing.

19

3. Materials employed for 3D/4D printing in dentistry

3.1 Polymers

3.1.1 Vinyl polymers

Vinyl polymers are the most commonly used polymers in dentistry because of their

tunable properties. They are produced from vinyl monomers using FRP (Figure 9A).

Although vinyl polymers are biocompatible, the majority of them are not biodegradable

making them unfavoured material for many medical applications, but not dentistry, since

degradation is not desirable for a long-term use, such as dental implants. For this reason,

new synthesis methods such as controlled radical polymerization (CRP) have been

implemented to tune material properties and control the molecular weight of the resulting

polymer, as well as their end and chain functional groups. Vinyl polymers are extensively

used for dental 3D printing that involves sintering (e.g., SLS) or photopolymerization (e.g.,

SLA) (Figure 9B) [70,73–76].

Figure 9. (A) General chemistry involved in the synthesis of vinyl polymers. (B) Photopolymerization of the

monomers.

Poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) is the most commonly used vinyl polymer in

dental 3D printing. It is polymerized from methyl methacrylate monomer via FRP or anionic

20

polymerization using 2,2´-azo-bis-isobutyronitrile or n-butyllithium as initiators,

respectively. PMMA is the most favorable material for printing denture base materials owing

to the ease of its processing, low cost, lightweight, stability in the oral environment, and

esthetic properties. However, PMMA has poor surface properties and weak mechanical

properties; the latter may be circumvented by using additives such as polyetheretherketone,

SiO2, and Al2O3 [3,77,78]. Furthermore, the addition of titanium dioxide yields

antimicrobial property.

3.1.2 Styrene polymers

There are two styrene polymers commonly utilized in dental 3D printing: polystyrene

(PS) and acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS). PS is an aromatic hydrocarbon polymerized

from styrene monomers via FRP, using benzoyl peroxide as initator (Figure 10). It is

structurally amorphous with high transparency and a smooth surface. Mechanical properties

and ease of fabrictaion make it a good candidate for dental applications [79,80]. High impact

PS was used to prepare 3D printed objects using fused filament fabrication, with

improvement of the properties of the resulting product [81]. Photopolymerization strategies

are similar to those discussed in the previous session.

Figure 10. Free radical polymerization of polystyrene from styrene monomer and benzoyl peroxide as initiator.

Another material used in 3D printing is ABS, a thermoplastic polymer that inherits its

superior properties from its monomers: acrylonitrile, butadiene and styrene [82,83]. Each of

21

the monomers contributes to the quality of ABS. Therefore, ABS owes its heat tolerance,

high impact strength, and rigidity to acrylonitrile, butadiene, and styrene respectively.

Different initiators have been used for the synthesis of ABS via FRP: t-butyl or cumene

hydroperoxide/sodium formaldehyde sulfoxylate dihydrate/EDTA-chelated Fe2+ redox,

ammonium persulfate, ammonium persulfate/sodium bisulfite redox initiator and oil-soluble

2.2'-azobis(2,4-dimethylvaleronitrile). FDM and SLS are usually employed for 3D printing

of ABS [84–86].

3.1.3 Polyesters

Polyester refers to a group of thermoplastic polymers that contain ester functional

groups in the main chain. They are polymerized via polycondensation by the removal of

water molecules (Figure 11). The three most popular polyesters are polycarbonate (PC),

polycaprolactone (PCL) and polylactic acid (PLA) [87,88].

Figure 11. Synthesis of polyesters by polycondensation.

PCs are polymerized via polycondensation reaction between bisphenol A and carbonyl

chloride/diphenyl carbonate from the main chain. They are mechanically robust, amorphous

and transparent polymers. PCs are used extensively in dentistry to produce orthodontic

brackets, denture bases and prefabricated provisional crowns. They have been used

experimentally as a based composite printed by FDM [89]. Despite the advantageous

properties of PC, there is a probability of bisphenol A release making it a potentially harmful

substance [90].

22

PCL is synthesized via ring-opening polymerization of ɛ-caprolactone monomers in the

presence of a catalyst such as stannous octanoate. PCL is a biodegradable and biocompatible

polyester with high in vivo stability because of its hydrophobicity. In the field of 3D printing,

PCL is of interest because of its low melting point (~63°C), making is useful for printing

techniques such as FDM. Furthermore, 3D-printed PCL is used in bone tissue regeneration

such as alveolar bone augmentation [91].

PLA is one of the most extensively used polymers in human body-related applications

[92,93]. It is synthesized from lactic acid via polycondensation, and in some cases via ring-

opening polymerization. The latter results in lower molecular weight and more brittle PLA.

PLA is highly biocompatible and possesses tunable physicochemical properties. The

excellent processability of PLA enables it to be used in different 3D printing methods and

for various applications as FDM printing of drill guides for surgical insertion of dental

implants, [94] and provisional restorations for protecting teeth after crown preparations [95].

3.2 Metal-based materials

Metals are vastly employed in fabricating biocompatible devices, especially when

resistance to corrosion, and wear is required [96,97]. Mechanical properties and

biocompatibility are also important factors for choosing metal for biomedical applications.

Biocompatibility of a metallic material enables the material to perform its desired function

without eliciting undesirable local or systemic effects on the surrounding tissues. Despite

many types of metallic materials available, only a few of them are biologically compatible

with the human body and can be used for long-term applications [98].

3.2.1 Stainless steel alloys

The earliest metal implant, introduced in the early 1990s, was made of vanadium steel

[99]. However, it was associated with premature loss of implant function, patient

dissatisfaction and a need for revision surgery because of mechanical and corrosion failure.

As a consequence, stainless steel alloys with more advanced characteristics were introduced

[100,101]. 302 stainless steel alloy was initially developed as an alternative to vanadium

steel [102]. It was subsequently replaced by two other stainless steel alloys, 316 and 316 low

carbon content (L). These alloys contain molybdenum and at least 11% chromium yielding

corrosion resist ncea [103]. Formation of a protective Cr-based oxide film on the alloy surface

occurs spontaneously in the body environment. This passive surface layer improves

corrosion resistance and wear resistance of the fabricated implant [99]. Moreover, a

maximum amount of 17-20% nickel helps to stabilize the austenitic phase at room

23

temperature and increases corrosion resistance [103]. Nevertheless, the presence of a large

amount of Cr and Ni in these stainless steel alloys can provoke an allergic reaction in

patients, which require revision surgery for their retrieval [104]. These stainless steel alloys

are also not suitable for manufacturing permanent implants [105]. Their low mechanical

properties render them susceptible to stress, corrosion, cracking and pitting corrosion, with

formation of deep pits on the metal surface. Implant failure initiates from these weakened

spots along with the passive surface layer, which propagates through the bulk material [106].

3.2.2 Titanium and its alloys

The use of stainless steel as implants was eventually replaced by titanium and its alloys

due to their improved corrosion resistance, biocompatibility, strength, and lightweight

[107,108]. Commercially pure titanium (CP-Ti) and Ti-6Al-4V are the most biocompatible

titanium alloys. They are the preferred materials for manufacturing orthopedic implants

[109,110]. In addition, the formation of a thin, stable oxide film on the surface of titanium

and its alloys contribute to their excellent corrosion resistance [111]. Bulk titanium alloy has

a much higher Young’s modulus than a natural bone (110 vs. 10-30 GPa, respectively) [112].

making it inapplicable for orthopedic use, since materials with Young’s moduli exceeding

that of a natural bone cause stress-shielding and subsequently bone resorption, which results

in loosening of the implant. Despite the advanced properties of Ti-6Al-4V it cannot be used

without surface treatment and coating due to its poor wear resistance. There are also potential

concerns with toxicity of the vanadium or aluminum present in the alloy [113]. The second

generation of titanium alloys have since been introduced that have lower moduli of elasticity

(e.g., Ti-12Mo-6Zr-2Fe, Ti-15Mo-5Zr-3Al, Ti-15Sn-4Nb-2Ta-0.2Pd and To-13Nb-

13Zr(.[114] However, these alloys are more embrittlement-susceptible due to the oxygen

dissolution caused by the oxygen diffusion into titanium which is introduced during

fabrication/heat treatment. In addition, their higher cost have led to their substitution with

cobalt-based alloys [115].

3.2.3 Cobalt-based alloys

Cobalt-based alloys have attracted considerable interest as medical implant materials

because of their superior corrosion and wear resistance, excellent mechanical properties,

biocompatibility and low rigidity [116]. The first cobalt chromium (CoCr)-based implant

was fabricated in 1930. More than half a century of research has led to refinement in the

manufacturing of this alloy for biomedical use [117].

24

Four types of CoCr-based alloys are available for biomedical applications, including

cast CoCrMo alloy (F75), wrought CoCrWNi alloy (F90), wrought CoNiCrMo alloy (F562)

and wrought CoNiCrMoWFe alloy (F563) [118]. Among the CoCr alloys, cobalt chromium

molybdenum (CoCrMo) alloys are of major interest due to their advanced corrosion and

wear resistance, high tensile and yield strength, and biocompatibility [104]. In addition,

integration of oxide-forming elements such as Cr, Mo and Co makes them

thermodynamically favorable for the formation of a thin protective passive oxide film after

exposure to body fluids. This protective oxide layer is mostly composed of Cr2O3 with minor

amounts of Co- and Mo-oxides [119].

Cobalt is the major alloying element of CoCrMo alloys. Cobalt imparts an unstable face

centered cubic (FCC) crystal structure with very low stacking fault energy to the alloy. At a

temperature of 690 K, Co-based alloys experience a change in their crystal structure, from

unstable FCC to a hexagonal close-packed (HCP) crystal structure. This transformation

occurs at relatively slow cooling rates. Since the transition from FCC to HCP is kinetically

arrested at room temperature, the main crystalline structure of Co-based alloys is unstable

FCC structure [120]. Transformation from FCC to HCP crystalline structure only occurs at

high temperature after long-term exposure and/or application of mechanical stress. Both

methods provide atoms with enough time to rearrange themselves from an unstable to a

metastable structure, which leads to significant improvements in yield strength and reduced

fatigue damage under cyclic stresses [121,122]. These properties account for the wear

resistance and corrosion resistance of cobalt-based alloys [122].

Chromium has a significant effect on the alloy’s properties [123]. Presence of ~28%

chromium is the main reason for their corrosion resistance, which is characterized by the

formation of a protective oxide film on the surface of the alloy segregating the surface from

aggressive agents. Chromium is also the predominant carbide former. The embedded carbide

in the alloys matrix serves as structural hardening sites that imparts additional strength to the

matrix. Chromium-rich carbide, especially M23C6, is the most common carbide in CoCrMo

alloys [124].

Molybdenum is another important constituent of CoCrMo alloys. It typically comprises

5-7 wt% of the alloys [125]. Molybdenum enables solid solution strengthening of the alloy

due to its large atomic size. It serves as structural blocking sites for dislocation flow when

present as solute atoms. In addition, formation of an Mo-oxide layer on the alloy surface

25

imparts corrosion resistance to the alloy. If Mo is higher than 5 wt%, M6C carbide may also

precipitate during alloy fabrication, which adds strength to the matrix [126].

Carbon is also an important constituent in the chemical composition of the alloy. Carbon

is a FCC stabilizer which strengthens the alloy by forming carbide within the matrix. Based

on the carbon content in the alloy, CoCrMo alloys are categorized into ‘low carbon alloy’

(0.06 wt%) and ‘high carbon alloy’ (0.15-0.25 wt%). Increase in carbon content results in

improvement in corrosion, wear and tribocorrosion resistance of the CoCrMo alloy [127].

Despite having exceptional corrosion and wear resistance and excellent biocompatibility,

CoCrMo alloys have poor frictional properties and may cause an allergic reaction due to

their nickel content [128].

Metal-based AM techniques such as SLS and SLM are used extensively for fabricating

3D structures from a starting mixture of metal alloy powders characteristics of which are

critical for reproducibility of the printed metallic parts. Metal powders used in 3D printing

need to be spherical and have a stringent particle size distribution to achieve good packing

behavior. This enables fabrication of dense and complex metallic parts with predictable

mechanical properties. With the use of metal-based AM techniques, it is possible to fabricate

fully-functional components using laser sintering in a layer-by-layer process.

The properties of AM alloys used for dental application have been investigated in

different studies. For example, microstructure and hardness of CoCrMo dental alloys

manufactured by casting, milling and SLS have been evaluated [129–131]. The highest

hardness value was achieved by SLS (371 ± 10 HV), followed by casting (320 ± 12 HV) and

milling (297 ± 5 HV). In another study, SLS-fabricated CoCrMo alloys had better

mechanical properties and less dissolution of metal ions than cast alloys [132]. The total Co

ions released into solution was lower in alloys produced by SLS [132]. Both groups of

authors suggested SLS as a better fabrication method for dental devices than the

conventional casting technique.

3.3 Ceramics

The use of ceramics has become very common in dental clinical practice as well as in

research. Ceramics are highly biocompatible and possess strong mechanical properties,

excellent wear resistance and superior esthetics compared with titanium or CoCr alloys

[133]. These advantages have been harnessed in the development of 3D printed ceramic

systems [10,134]. The following section discusses zirconia and alumina as ceramic materials

26

for dental application.

3.3.1 Zirconia

The use of zirconia for fabricating metal-free ceramic dental implants began with the

introduction of the Z-System in 2004 [135]. These implants osseointegrate well with hard

tissues and are highly biocompatible with soft oral tissues. Different methods of treating the

implant surface were employed to enhance osteoblast adhesion, differentiation and to

improve bone-implant osseointegration [136]. Three major surface treatment methods have

been employed: surface roughening, surface coating with active compositions to convert a

bio-inert surface into a bioactive surface, and reducing surface contaminant to enhance

surface hydrophilicity [137]. These methods include surface treatment with oxygen

plasma,[138] acid-etching,[139] ultraviolet irradiation or hydrogen peroxide treatmet [140].

A previous study indicated that zirconia implants osseointegrate at least as well as titanium

implants [141]. The strength of zirconia implants lies in their ability to accommodate peri-

impant soft tissues well. In vitro data reported that zirconia decreases inflammatory

response, plaque accumulation, reduce bacterial population and modify fibroblast adhesion

and proliferation [142,143]. As an example, yttria-stabilized zirconia (3Y-TZP) powder has

been blended with acrylates and methacrylates, photoinitiator and dispersing agent to create

a homogenous hybrid sol. This “ink” can be photopolymerized by a 3D printer with light-

curing capability. SL was used for printing dental bridges (Figure 12) [133].

Figure 12. The use of ceramic (zirconia) for 3D printing of dental bridges. (A) An illustration of the ceramic

stereolithography process. (B) Additive manufacturing of zirconia dental bridges after (I) printing, (II)

debinding and (III) sintering. (IV) The corresponding change in size of zirconia-based dental implants after

each step. Reprinted with permission from [133].

27

3.3.2 Alumina

Aluminum oxide or alumina (Al2O3) is a ceramic material produced from alumina

trihydrate. It is available in different forms (e.g., α, χ, η, δ, κ, θ, γ and ρ). All these forms

exist during heat treatment of aluminum hydroxide [144]. The most thermodynamically

stable form is α-aluminum oxide. This material is used for such dentistry applications as

ceramic abutments, endodontic posts, orthodontic brackets, dental implants, and crowns

[134]. The high purity of alumina (~99.99% pure) makes it a suitable candidate for replacing

metal alloys in some dental applications [33]. Alumina is wear-resistant and biocompatible

but is less compact and has lower flexural strength compared with zirconia [145]. To

improve the mechanical properties of alumina, it is possible to infiltrate zirconia into the

alumina matrix to produce a mineral composite [146]. The toughness and fracture resistance

of alumina may be altered by controlling the grain size and porosity, the number of sinter

cycles, sintering temperature and time, heating/cooling rates, and the addition of stabilizer

such as zirconium oxide, magnesium oxide or chromium oxide [147,148]. An alumina

ceramic with submicron grain‐size has been prepared for dental applications, with

improvements in mechanical properties and optical quality. Studies on polycrystalline

alumina ceramics indicate that alumina with grain size less than 1 µm and a porosity level

of less than 0.7 percent has the same degree of translucency as commercial high‐translucency

porcelain [149].

3.4 Responsive materials for 4D printing

Four-dimensional printing adds the time dimension to 3D printing by producing pieces

made of smart materials. 4D printing indeed combines 3D printing with the use of responsive

materials that change their properties or shape in response to mechanical, chemical, thermal

or electrical stimuli. Smart materials may be divided into shape-memory materials and

shape-changing materials [11]. Shape memory materials may be derived from alloys,

polymers or ceramics. Each material has advantages and disadvantages depending on the

applications of the material. Shape memory polymers have applications in dentistry

including orthodontics, endodontics, prosthodontics, oral surgery and implantology [150–

152]. Through molecular view, shape memory polymers are elastic matrixes enjoying some

reversible functional covalent cross-linking. This kind of polymers consists of functional

groups that undergo some changes toward a temporary shape under a stimulus. They can

subsequently reverse that change to the previous permanent shape once the stimulus is

canceled; or they undergo cleaving the covalent bond induced by the stimuli between the

28

functional groups throughout the matrix [153]. To prepare a 3D printed object that responds

to external or internal stimuli, sensitive materials should be employed in these systems

(Figure 13). Some examples are presented n the following paragraphs.

Magnetically-sensitive materials are generally constructed by embedding magnetic

nanocompounds (e.g., Fe, Co, Ni, Fe2O3, Fe3O4, CuFe2O4, ZnFe2O4, NiFe2O4) into the raw

material. These nanomaterials are utilized in-situ (embedded) or decorated/mixed with the

pre-defined materials for printing [154,155]. Electrically-responsive materials are

manufactured by incorporating inherently-conductive polymers (e.g., polyacetylene,

polypyrrole, polyaniline, polythiophene) as well as their derivatives or copolymers into the

material. Conductive carbon-based nanostructures and metal nanoparticles may also be used

for this purpose [156,157].

Figure 13 (A) Schematic of the deformation of a 4D-printed object in response to a stimulus. (B)

Types of responses that may occur in 4D-printed dynamic materials. (C) Internal or external stimulus

that may be utilized for triggering a 4D response.

Light-responsive materials are fabricated from light-conducting materials or materials

29

comprising azobenzene, stilbene, spiropyran, fulgide or diarylethene, as well as

photosensitive-metal nanostructures (e.g., TiO2, Pt and Au) [158,159]. Ultrasound-sensitive

materials comprise polymers the bonds of which are cleaved in the presence of high

ultrasound intensity. These polymers are classified into biodegradable (e.g., polyglycolides

and polylactides) and non-biodegradable polymers (e.g., poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) and

poly(lactide-co-glycolide)) [160,161].

Thermo-responsive materials (e.g., poly(N-isopropyl acrylamide), poly(N-

vinylcaprolactam), gelatin, collagen, soybean oil epoxidized acrylate, pluronic and

poly(ether urethane) are frequently employed materials in 4D printing platforms [162–164].

pH-sensitive materials swell or collapse depending on the surrounding pH due to the

presence of functional groups such as hydroxyl (−OH), carboxylic (−COOH), sulfonic acid

(−SO3H) and amine (−NH2) groups in the polymer chain [165,166]. Moisture-sensitive

materials (e.g., hydrogels) are similar and have similar hydrophilic functional group as the

pH-responsive systems. Their hydrophilicity causes the systems to swell to a volume greater

than the original volume [166,167].

There is another class of materials that responds to a biological stimulus (e.g., glucose,

enzymes). For example, the level of blood glucose may be controlled by using smart

materials that release insulin in response to the blood sugar level [11].

The characteristics of smart materials include self-sensing, self-responsiveness, shape

memory, self-repair, self-adaptability and multi-functionality. Smart materials fall into two

major categories, shape-memory materials which recover their original shape following a

stimulus and shape-changing materials which maintain their original shape and undergo

morphology change in response to a stimulus [164,168].

Experimental dental 4D printing began in 2012. Although the technology is not yet

commercially available, it represents a quantum leap in AM capability. For example, 4D

printed dental implants possess the capability to alter their shape in response to changes in

oral temperature and humidity. The properties that these implants possess are comparable to

those exhibited by natural teeth [150,169].

3.5 Materials Safty

Ceramic materials used in dentistry are reported to be relatively safe and free of toxicity for

dental pulp or periodontal tissue surrounding the material [170–172]. Corrosion is the main

30

complication followed by metal devices in the oral cavity. Nickel and chrome are the most

substances found in the oral cavity, due to placement of orthodontic appliances, metal

crowns, metal bridge or prosthesis devices. Several other consequences might be followed

with application of metal such as hypersensitivity, cytotoxicity, or genotoxicity. Exposure

of oral mucosa to metal leads to inflammation, pain, redness or at a deeper level causes

cellular metabolism disturbance. Depending on the degree of corrosion that metal undergoes,

its carcinogenesis ability varies. The symptoms can appear at distance from metal alloy

[173–175].

Polymer materials have various applications in dentistry, however, their main form of

application in 3D printers are light curable resins. The uncured resins including monomers,

macromonomers, and initiators are not biocompatible materials. After photocuring, the degree

of conversion is relatively high which means the amount of unreacted monomers is decreased;

however, the residual monomers may lead to irritation of mucosa, inflammation, ulceration

and edema. The side effects of residual monomers are not only limited in local tissue and affect

systemic circulation in case of blood stream entry [176]. This situation may be better for the

3D printers (e.g., FDM method) that do not employ resin. At least, for the filaments used for

FDM approach, there are no cytotoxic monomers but the type of polymer/composite employed

for filament should be taken into consideration. However, for a specific 3D printer, most

providers sell a different range of resins from biocompatible (for medical applications) to non-

biocompatible compounds (for other applications). Accordingly, based on the targeted

applications, the desired materials can be selected.

4. Applications

Over the last decade, 3D printing technology is increasingly being utilized in dental

education and patient treatment. Examples include the manufacture of drill guides for

prosthodontics, orthodontics, endodontics and oral maxillofacial surgery. New technologies

have been developed for the production of dentures and implants, and the fabrication of

bridges, crowns, aligners and orthodontic brackets [34,177]. The recent advances in the

applications of 3D printing in dentistry will be highlighted below. Table 2 represents the

applications of 3D printing in dentistry.

31

Table 2. Recent applications of 3D printing in dentistry.

Method Schematic illustration Applications References

Stereolithography

Temporary and permanent crowns

Temporary bridges

Temporary restorations

Surgical guides and templates

Dental replica models

[3,27]

[178–180]

[181,182]

[22,26,183]

Fused deposition modeling

Denture flasks

Bites

Mouth guards

Oral drug delivery device

[133]

[14]

[184]

Selective laser sintering

Custom-made dental implants

Partial dentures

[185–187]

32

Photopolymer Jetting

Temporary crowns

Dental replica models

[27,188–190]

Powder Binder Printer

Study casts [18,191]

Digital Light Processing

Temporary and permanent crowns

Removable dental prosthesis

[192]

[193]

33

4.1. Dentures

Tooth loss occurs due to trauma, fracture, periodontal disease and caries [194,195].

Different methods have been used to replace missing teeth, such as complete or partial

removable prostheses, teeth-supported bridges and implant-supported crowns. In the past,

construction of a prosthetic device commences with the taking of an alginate or

polyvinylsiloxane impression. A model is subsequently constructed for complex laboratory

work performed by a skilled dental technician. The advent CAD/compute-aided manufacturing

(CAD/CAM) systems has completely revolutionalized how dental prostheses are constructed.

There are three phases in the construction scheme. The first phase involves acquisition of

virtual impressions using intraoral and extraoral scanners and registering the patient’s

occlusion. The second phase consists of prosthesis design using computer softwares. These

procedures may be performed in the the laboratory or a dental clinic. This enables the

practitioner to have better visualization of the final product. The third phase involves

prosthesis construction, which may be performed using additive or subtractive manufacturing

techniques [196–198].

Denture design and manufacturing now involves the use of 3D printing technology in

combination with digital modeling and computational optimization. Both denture bases and

denture teeth are now printed by 3D printing technology using methacrylate-based

photopolymerizable resins [199,200]. Denture based and artificial teeth are printed separately

and are subsequently attached together using a photo-curable bonding agent. Unlike

conventional denture processing technique which involves compression molding and hot water

processing, 3D printed dentures enables more efficacious clinical modification, which reduces

patient discomfort as well as long-term residual bone resorption (Figure 14) [34,177,199–201].

34

Figure 14. (A) Intraoral scanning for taking virtual impression of a patient’s pre-existing teeth. (B) 3D illustration

of denture file from a design software. (C) A real tooth size configuration used for reconstruction of the denture.

(D) Digital sculpting of denture teeth secured to a denture flask. Pink denture base acrylic resin is to be injected

through the injection port. (E) Separate illustration of the denture and flask from the analyzing software. (F) 3D–

printed flask. (G) Placement of the teeth into the flask. The teeth were fabricated also by 3D printing. (H)

Combination of upper and lower denture flasks produced by 3D printing. (I) Separate printed upper and lower

flasks showing packing of acryic resin. (J) Detachment of the flask and denture parts. (K) Polished, completed 3D

printed denture. Reprinted with permission from [184,202].

4.2. Crowns and bridges

3D printing of dental crowns and bridges is one of the most attractive applications of 3D

printing technology in dentistry. Crowns may be placed on teeth for protecting the underlying

tooth structure, or on dental implants to make them functional and tooth-like. One of the most

important uses of crowns is to serve as an anchor (i.e. tooth abutment) for replacing a missing

tooth. Recently, 3D printing technology has been utilized to fabricate crowns and bridges. In

addition, low-cost 3D printers have been used for fabricating more precise provisional crown

and bridge restorations using SLA printing techqniue [203]. SLA offers great efficiency and

high level of accuracy [204]. By using SLA, an object can be produced at a resolution down to

0.05 mm, making this method a superior technique in accuracy, even compared to some new

techniques such as digital light projection (DLP) [205]. However, the process of

35

photopolymeter curing in DLP printer is fairly faster than SLA, since SLA uses laser light

photopolymer sources that process layer by layer [206].

4.3. Orthodontic appliances and orthotics

3D printing provides exciting opportunities for fabricating tooth-fitting orthodontic

devices such as Invisalign® aligners [207]. Aligners are popular alternatives to braces for

treatment of mild malocclusion because they are transparent and can be removed for eating,

drinking and tooth brushing. In 3D printing of clear aligners, the orthodontist takes a virtual

impression of the patient’s upper or lower arch using an intraoral scanner. Stereolithography

or FDM is then used to print the model for thermoforming the aligner. 3D printing reduces

production time without altering the quality of the aligners. This acceleration is attributed to

the reduction in manufacturing steps (Figure 15).

Figure 15. Designin an aligner. (A) Steps involved in conventional processing (B) Workflow in 3D printing.

Orthotics are used for treatment of malocclusion and relief of temporomanidular joint

symptoms. These appliances can also be fabricated by the use of intraoral scanners and 3D

printers. Nanofillers used for reinforcing these appliances, such as silica and hydroxyapatite,

do not bind to the resin during SLA. In light of this, the surface of HAp was decorated with

methacrylate functionality to enhance adhesion of the nanofillers to the polymer matrix (Figure

16) [14]. Quaternary ammonium salts have also been functionalized on the nanofillers to impart

antibacterial and antifungal activities. The resulting orthotics exhibited enhanced mechanical

properties and possessed antimicrobial activity [14].

36

Figure 16. (A) Surface functionalization of hydroxyapatite. (B) 3D CAD drawing of an orthodontic aligner (left

panel) and the photograph of the corresponding aligner fabricated by SLA (right panel). (C) Scanning electron

microscopy image of the material used for construction of a nanofillers-reinforced orthotic (left panel). Energy

dispersive X-Ray (EDX) mappings of P (red) and Ca (green). (D) Antibacterial and antifungal properties of the

samples containing different ratios of the nanofiller. mHAP: modified HAP. Reprinted with permission from [14].

4.4. Oral and maxillofacial surgery

The advent of cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) has expedited the

development of 3D printing in dentistry. This has resulted in more accurate diagnosis and

treatment planning, as well as guidance during surgery, thereby reducing post-operative

complications. The types of surgery that benefit from the use of 3D printed devices include

maxillofacial surgeries, implant placement in difficult or ethetics-sensitive areas, sinus lift and

orthognathic surgeries.

Maxillofacial defects caused by trauma or cancer require extensive removal of the defect

as well as the surrounding tissues. Depending on the size of the defect, the severity of the

37

trauma and the patient’s economical condition, oral, nasal and orbital maxillofacial prostheses

are often required for post-surgical rehabilitation. The recent use of scanners for scanning the

area of involvement is a much more comfortable and precise means for fabricating the

prostheses. Maxillofacial prosthesis printed using AM methods have been shown to have

higher accuracy and better fit of the defect area [208,209].

Orthognathic surgeries are performed for patients with maxillary or mandibular deformity,

severe malocclusion and those requiring facial esthetic modifications. Development of 3D

printed models have improved patient communication as well as surgical outcome. Many of

the traditional operations are now replaced with the help of digital techniques, such as printing

of occlusal splints tht are more accurate and provide more accessible jaw positions during

surgery (Figure 17). The use of 3D printed osteotomy or genioplasty surgical guides reduces

operation time and minimizes injuries to nerves such as the inferior alveolar nerve[210].

The use of 3D printed surgical guides for implant placement in the edentulous area

improves hard and soft tissue healing aound the implant. Surgical guides are used in

challenging locations to improve implant placement accuracy. The surgical guide must have

adequate hard or sift tissue support to increase stability and balance during implant placement.

Support is gained by methods such as tooth-supported guides, mucosa-supported guides, bone-

supported guides and pin -supported guides. These guides are selected based on the number of

remaning teeth, the availability of hard and soft tissue support and the location of the implant

site [211].

38

Figure 17. (A) 3D printing of a patient’s jaw model after simulation for orthognathic surgery. (B) Positioning

and fixing the printed guides and occlusal splint. (C) A 3D printed model of the final position of segment. (D) An

illustration of the application of 3D printing in maxillofacial surgery. Reprinted with permission from [210].

4.4 3D printing of metals in dentistry

Accuracy and mechanical properties are the most important factors to be considered in

dentistry. Compared to conventional casting and forging techniques, additive manufacturing

of metal parts reduces manufacturing time and cost. More importantly, AM almost eliminates

all human errors as well as possible defects in the resulting product. According to the definition

of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), ASTM F2792, AM is “a process

of joining materials to make objects from 3D model data, usually layer upon layer, as opposed

to subtractive manufacturing methodologies”[212]. Selective laser sintering, selective laser

melting (SLM) and electron-beam additive manufacturing (EBM) are the three most

commonly used techniques for 3D printing of metal parts [213].

Dental metal alloys that utilize 3D printing technology include CoCr, Ti and tantalum

powders (Figure 18) [214]. For example, dental prostheses have been fabricated with CoCr

alloy powder using the SLM technique [215]. The potential of 3D printed metal parts in

dentistry is enormous. Metallic structures that can be 3D-printed include removable partial

39

denture, overdenture and fixed prosthetic frameworks, endodontic hand and rotary files and

metal implants. Metal frameworks were prepared by SLM technique to evaluate the accuracy

of removable partial denture frameworks. The authors showed that the frameworks

manufactured by SLM fit better than those fabricated by the lost-wax technique and metal

casting [216]. In another work, porous implants made of Ti and Ta were fabricated via SLM

and tested for their fitting accuracy. The authors reported that 3-D printed Ta implants were

better-fitting comparied to conventional Ti implants manufactured by milling. By using 3D

printing, the authors were able to optimize manufacturing cost and maximize reproducibility

[217].

Figure 18. 3D printing of metal in dentistry. (A) SEM image of tantalum powder used for 3D printing of dental

implants. (B) A 3D printed porous metal-based implant. (C, D) A 3D printed CoCr-based denture implant

framework. (E) Designing a removable partial denture framework prior to 3D printing. (F) A 3D printed CoCr

powder-based removable partial denture framework with accompanying support structures that have to be

removed after printing. Reprinted with permission from [213,214,216].

4.4. Hard and soft tissue engineering

Bone augmentation is an important procedure in patients with hard tissue defects who are

in need of implant placement. Insufficient bone results in lack of support and implant failure.

40

Hence, bone augmentation is necessary in selected cases prior to implant placement. The ideal

bone graft to be placed is an autograft derived from the patient’s own bone, which has both

osteoinductive and osteocondictive properties. Other alternative bone graft materials include

allografts, xenografts and alloplastics. A graft used for bone augmentation needs to have

specific properties, including biocompatibility, same shape and design as the defect, does not

induce an immune response, as well as porosities for tissues to access nutrients and

communicate with immune cells (Figure 19) [218].

Figure 19. Tissue augmentation workflow. (A) The soft tissue defect. (B) Scanned soft tissue defect. (C) Designed

soft tissue graft ready to be 3D printed. (D) 3D printed soft tissue graft. (E) Simulated surgical procedure.

Reprinted and modified with permission from [219].

Many biomaterials are available as hard tissue engineering scaffolds, such as polymers,

bioceramics and composites. To enhance the regeneration ability of the biomaterials, they

should be able to be loaded with stem cells; growth factors released by the stem cells are critical

for angiogenesis and osteogenesis. Scaffolds fabricated by 3D printers can be tuned by using

inks containing stem cells. This method of printing enables the stem cells to be placed at precise

locations. Moreover, precision 3D printing of complex scaffold surfaces enables more intimate

41

contact with bone surfaces, expedites healing and yields better esthetic results compared with

conventional scaffolds [220].

The periodontal ligament (PDL) absorbs masticatory stresses and provides the tooth with

micro-movement during mastication. The PDL contains blood vessels and nerve fibers.

Destruction of the PDL reduces tooth support, increases tooth movement and expedites

microbial infection. Periodontal bone defects may be covered with a 3D printed scaffold in

which mesenchymal stem cells are incorporated within the scaffold to enhance regeneration of

the PDL.

Soft tissue regeneration surgery has been used to improve root coverage of a tooth with

gingival recession or damaged soft tissue. Although the ideal graft is an autograft excised from

the palate or tuberosity, this generates post-operation discomfort for the patient. Recently, 3D

printed soft tissue grafts have been introduced for augmentation of keratinized tissue

surrounding teeth with periodontal defects. These soft tissue grafts can be printed to cover large

defects. Moreover, 3D printed soft tissue grafts permit more complicated designs and accuracy

to cover the defect. They are also better received by patient because of reduced post-operation

discomfort and expedited healing [219].

4.5. Mouthguards for drug delivery

Treating oral diseases by local release of a drug is common practice in oral medicine. 3D

printing permits the design of unique drug delivery systems with exceptional precision,

comprehensive three dimensional composition and manageable release patterns [83].

Chlorhexidine-coated mouthguards have been tested for suppression of oral bacteria in human

subjects [221]. A 3D printed wearable oral delivery device in the form of a mouthguard has

been fabricated via FDM to deliver a preloaded drug to the oral cavity (Figure 20) [184]. 3D

printed oral drug delivery mouthguards has immense potential for drug delivery in personalized

dental therapeutics.

42

Figure 20. Application of 3D printing in manufacturing of oral drug delivery mouthguards. Reprinted with

permission from [184].

4.6. 3D printing in endodontics

Three dimensional printing has been used to support nonsurgical and surgical root canal

treatment. As an example, 3D printing may be used experimentally for regeneration of new

teeth by stem cell delivery[219], or regeneration of the dental pulp by development of calcium

phosphate cements [222]. In addition, 3D printing has been used for printing tooth models to

simulate surgical procedures. For example, a tooth model was printed for root canal treatment

of a 12 year-old boy with tooth anomalies. The authors designed and printed a custom-made

guide for access into the canal spaces (Figure 21)[223]. The advantages of the 3D printing in

endodontics include improving the accuracy of access, enhancing the skills of non-specialists

and improved success with pulpal regeneration [224] In addition, 3D printed resin teeth are

useful in educating students and general practitioners in all steps of the root canal therapy. The

trainee can observe endodontic working length, root canal morphology and anatomy of the

apical delta, using transparent resin teeth constructed usingh CBCT data derived from extracted

natural teeth. During canal shaping, errors associated with the use of endodontic instruments,

such as gauging of preparation walls and canal transportation may be readily observed. More

importantly, 3D printed guides based on CBCT data are indispensable for finding highly

calcified canals in nonsurgical root canal treatment and for apicoetomy of posterior teeth in

surgical endodontics. The use of these guides has enabled more teeth to be saved by root canal

treatment.

43

Figure 21. A 3D printed, custom-made jig for complicated root canal treatment. (A) Panoramic radiograph of the

patient’s teeth. (B) Buccal view. (C) Coronal view. (D) Digital image view. I STL file. (F) 3D printed jig with a

hole that guides the insertion path and depth of a bur into the complicated root canal space. (G) Canal filing

simulation. (H) Location of glide path into the root canal space using the printed jig; (I) Intraoral radiograph 3

months after canal filling. Reprinted with permission from [223].

4.7. 3D printing application in dental education

Three dimensional printing in dentistry has extended beyond clinical application and has

been integrated into dental education [225]. 3D printed teeth serve as models for teaching

dental anatomy and for the practice of a wide range of dental procedures such as caries

excavation, pulp capping, core build-up, crown preparation as well as veneer preparation and

dental bonding [226]. These models are used for training predoctoral students and have

replaced the use of extracted teeth which are prone to contamination [227]. Apart from the

anatomical accuracy of the printed replicas, fabrication of these resin replica teeth can be done

by any institution that has access to CBCT and a 3D printer [228].

Three dimensionally-printed models are extensively used for pre-operative surgical

simulations. The ease of fabricating these surgical models provides a readily available resource

for oral and maxillofacial surgery [229]. It is beyond doubt that this versatile technology will

keep on improving over the course of its application. The elastic properties of currently

available materials and the geometric complexity of the printed models still require

improvements for perfect mimicking of human tissues [230].

5. 4D printing in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery: Challenges and future perspectives

In a nutshell, 4D printing technology can give active and responsive functions to their

counterpart 3D printed objects. It can be triggered by a response to different stimuli, for

example, light, to change their structure. Fortunately, through using simulations and analytical

44

calculations to theoretically model the structural changes are well predictable. In other words,

we know what will happen for the material which at the mercy of any external stimulus. In

dentistry, it is of the most interest to have such materials [231].

One of the most common materials used in orthodontics is nickel-titanium archwires, with

many advantages and disadvantages. Some of the drawbacks of these shape memory archwires

may be prevented with the application of shape memory polymers [151]. Superior esthetics

improved elastic modulus, enhanced mechanical and chemical stability and ability of the

archwire to self-adjust during the treatment make the application of this material more suitable

for the patient and the practitioner. Endodontics is another field that may benefit from 4D

printing. One of the most common complications during root canal therapy is instrument

separation. The ability of shape memory metals to adapt to root canal curvatures is an important

asset that makes them competitive as a replacement of traditional nickel titanium rotary

instruments in the future [12,232].

In prosthodontics, permanent seating of bridge pontics while the surrounding hard and soft

tissues are undergoing changes may result in suboptimal fitting of the pontics. Application of

shape memory polymers in these cases may be beneficial because of the self-adjustment

capability of the material, which helps to minimize future complications. Full or partial

removable dentures are often problematic for the patient because of bone resorption that

accompanies tooth removal, as well as forces applied over the bony ridge by the denture. As a

result, denture relining is a common procedure. The use of shape memory polymers for 4D

printing of dentures may improve the ability of these dentures to adapt to the altering hard and

soft tissue profiles. In implantology, titanium alloys are the most common materials used for

fabricating oral implants. Although there are many benefits associated with titanium alloys,

hypersensitivity and surface degradation have been reported. Replacement of titanium alloys

with shape memory polymers may result in improved biocompatibility and better

osseointegration [164]. Shape-memory polymers are advantageous by well filling the root

canals, leading to prevent reinfections, biofilm formation, and periradicular diseases. They

exhibit the natural tooth like expansion and contraction to fill the gap at the interface,

decreasing the microleakage as well. Shape-memory polymers also produce biocompatible

degradation products—they are biocompatible—as well as not produce metal ions which

triggering chronic diseases, in comparison with metals. By the features far outweighing other

types of materials, the shape-memory polymers show great stability and much more

effectiveness, at least here in dentistry [233].

45

6. Conclusion and outlook

Three dimensional printing has been employed for rapid prototyping of different objects

and equipments. Over the last decade, 3D printing technology has expanded rapidly across

different medical sectors, including dentistry. New feed materials and printing methods are

being developed to reduce design time, expedite fabrication and improve performance. Quality

traits such as particle size, shape, distribution of the feed material powder as well as density,

flowability and viscosity of the polymer directly affect the mechanical performance of the final

product [234–237]. Viscosity-dependent flowability of polymers and metal allays is a

challenge in 3D printing. Clinical dentistry requires fabrication of custom dental devices that

differs from one patient to another. Dentistry may be the final industry for rapid prototyping

technology to move into because it demands precise manufacturing and accuracy.

The advantages of 3D printing in dentistry have already been mentioned. It is important

to point out that there are several aspects of 3D printing that require enhancement, such as

improvement in surface quality, mechanical properties and dimensional accuracy. Printing

products with better surface quality is directly related to the processing technique, the thickness

of each layer and the depth of polymerization. The mechanical properties of the printed product

are associated with porosity and surface quality. The porosity of a material depends on the

particle size and processing temperature; material infiltration has been proposed to overcome

this obstacle. Shrinkage of printing materials during manufacturing may result in significant

reduction of mechanical properties. Dimensional accuracy of the products printed by 3D

printers varies with the use of printing techniques and has a significant impact on the passive

fit of dental prostheses .

Acknowledgment

P. M. and V. M. acknowledge funding from the European Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation

Programme under Grant Agreement No 899349 (5D NanoPrinting).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

[1] M. Carlotti, V. Mattoli, Functional Materials for Two‐Photon Polymerization in

Microfabrication, Small. 15 (2019) 1902687.

[2] A. Sadeghi, E. Del Dottore, A. Mondini, B. Mazzolai, Passive Morphological

Adaptation for Obstacle Avoidance in a Self-Growing Robot Produced by Additive

46

Manufacturing, Soft Robot. 7 (2020) 85–94. https://doi.org/10.1089/soro.2019.0025.

[3] X. Li, B. Xie, J. Jin, Y. Chai, Y. Chen, 3D Printing Temporary Crown and Bridge by

Temperature Controlled Mask Image Projection Stereolithography, Procedia Manuf. 26

(2018) 1023–1033.

[4] D.H. Ballard, A.P. Trace, S. Ali, T. Hodgdon, M.E. Zygmont, C.M. DeBenedectis, S.E.

Smith, M.L. Richardson, M.J. Patel, S.J. Decker, Clinical applications of 3D printing:

primer for radiologists, Acad. Radiol. 25 (2018) 52–65.

[5] W. Yang, W.S. Choi, Y.Y. Leung, J.P. Curtin, R. Du, C. Zhang, X. Chen, Y. Su, Three-

dimensional printing of patient-specific surgical plates in head and neck reconstruction:

a prospective pilot study, Oral Oncol. 78 (2018) 31–36.

[6] D. Chytas, M. Piagkou, E.O. Johnson, Can Three‐Dimensional Visualization

Technologies be More Effective than Cadavers for Dental Anatomy Education?, Anat.

Sci. Educ. 13 (2020) 664–665.

[7] J.C. Ruiz-Morales, A. Tarancón, J. Canales-Vázquez, J. Méndez-Ramos, L. Hernández-

Afonso, P. Acosta-Mora, J.R.M. Rueda, R. Fernández-González, Three dimensional

printing of components and functional devices for energy and environmental

applications, Energy Environ. Sci. 10 (2017) 846–859.

[8] T.-S. Jang, H.-D. Jung, M.H. Pan, W.T. Han, S. Chen, J. Song, 3D printing of hydrogel

composite systems: Recent advances in technology for tissue engineering, Int J Bioprint,

4 (2018) 126-131.

[9] Z. Lu, O.I. Ayeni, X. Yang, H.-Y. Park, Y.-G. Jung, J. Zhang, Microstructure and Phase

Analysis of 3D-Printed Components Using Bronze Metal Filament, J. Mater. Eng.

Perform. (2020) 1–7.

[10] T.D. Ngo, A. Kashani, G. Imbalzano, K.T.Q. Nguyen, D. Hui, Additive manufacturing

(3D printing): A review of materials, methods, applications and challenges, Compos.

Part B Eng. (2018).

[11] W. Zhou, Z. Qiao, E.N. Zare, J. Huang, X. Zheng, X. Sun, M. Shao, H. Wang, X. Wang,

D. Chen, J. Zheng, S. Fang, Y.M. Li, X. Zhang, L. Yang, P. Makvandi, A. Wu, 4D-

Printed Dynamic Materials in Biomedical Applications: Chemistry, Challenges, and

Their Future Perspectives in the Clinical Sector, J. Med. Chem. In press (2020).

https://doi.org/acs.jmedchem.9b02115.

[12] A.Y. Lee, J. An, C.K. Chua, Two-Way 4D Printing: A Review on the Reversibility of

3D-Printed Shape Memory Materials, Engineering. 3 (2017) 663–674.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENG.2017.05.014.

[13] M. Dehurtevent, L. Robberecht, J.-C. Hornez, A. Thuault, E. Deveaux, P. Béhin,

Stereolithography: a new method for processing dental ceramics by additive computer-

aided manufacturing, Dent. Mater. 33 (2017) 477–485.

[14] P. Makvandi, C. Esposito Corcione, F. Paladini, A.L. Gallo, F. Montagna, R. Jamaledin,

M. Pollini, A. Maffezzoli, Antimicrobial modified hydroxyapatite composite dental bite

by stereolithography, Polym. Adv. Technol. 29 (2018) 364–371.

[15] A.E. Ersoy, I. Turkyilmaz, O. Ozan, E.A. McGlumphy, Reliability of implant placement

with stereolithographic surgical guides generated from computed tomography: clinical

data from 94 implants, J. Periodontol. 79 (2008) 1339–1345.

47

[16] Y. Sun, H. Luebbers, J.O. Agbaje, S. Schepers, C. Politis, S. Van Slycke, L. Vrielinck,

Accuracy of dental implant placement using CBCT‐derived mucosa‐supported

stereolithographic template, Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. 17 (2015) 862–870.

[17] J.-P. Kruth, B. Vandenbroucke, J. Van Vaerenbergh, I. Naert, Digital manufacturing of

biocompatible metal frameworks for complex dental prostheses by means of SLS/SLM,

Proc. VRAP, Leir. (2005) 139–146.

[18] J. Liu, B. Zhang, C. Yan, Y. Shi, The effect of processing parameters on characteristics

of selective laser sintering dental glass‐ceramic powder, Rapid Prototyp. J. (2010).

[19] J.-P. Kruth, B. Vandenbroucke, J. Van Vaerenbergh, I. Naert, Rapid manufacturing of

dental prostheses by means of selective laser sintering/melting, Proc. AFPR S. 4 (2005)

176–186.

[20] N.K. Tolochko, V. V Savich, T. Laoui, L. Froyen, G. Onofrio, E. Signorelli, V.I. Titov,

Dental root implants produced by the combined selective laser sintering/melting of

titanium powders, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part L J. Mater. Des. Appl. 216 (2002) 267–

270.

[21] P.M. Gronet, G.A. Waskewicz, C. Richardson, Preformed acrylic cranial implants using

fused deposition modeling: a clinical report, J. Prosthet. Dent. 90 (2003) 429–433.

[22] R.E. Rebong, K.T. Stewart, A. Utreja, A.A. Ghoneima, Accuracy of three-dimensional

dental resin models created by fused deposition modeling, stereolithography, and

Polyjet prototype technologies: A comparative study, Angle Orthod. 88 (2018) 363–

369.

[23] J. Brandt, H.-C. Lauer, T. Peter, S. Brandt, Digital process for an implant-supported

fixed dental prosthesis: a clinical report, J. Prosthet. Dent. 114 (2015) 469–473.

[24] V.N.V.M.R. Daule, Rapid prototyping and its application in dentistry, J. Dent. Allied

Sci. 2 (2013) 57–61.

[25] A. Kessler, R. Hickel, M. Reymus, 3D printing in dentistry—state of the art, Oper. Dent.

45 (2020) 30–40.

[26] A. Hazeveld, J.J.R. Huddleston Slater, Y. Ren, Accuracy and reproducibility of dental

replica models reconstructed by different rapid prototyping techniques, Am. J. Orthod.

Dentofac. Orthop. 145 (2014) 108–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.05.011.

[27] H.-N. Mai, K.-B. Lee, D.-H. Lee, Fit of interim crowns fabricated using photopolymer-

jetting 3D printing, J. Prosthet. Dent. 118 (2017) 208–215.

[28] S. Prasad, N.A. Kader, G. Sujatha, T. Raj, S. Patil, 3D printing in dentistry, (2018).

[29] P.W. Poeschl, N. Schmidt, G. Guevara-Rojas, R. Seemann, R. Ewers, H.T. Zipko, K.

Schicho, Comparison of cone-beam and conventional multislice computed tomography

for image-guided dental implant planning, Clin. Oral Investig. 17 (2013) 317–324.

[30] A. Dawood, B.M. Marti, V. Sauret-Jackson, A. Darwood, 3D printing in dentistry, Br.

Dent. J. 219 (2015) 521–529.

[31] R. Jain, B.S. Supriya, K. Gupta, Recent Trends of 3-D Printing in Dentistry-A review,

Ann Prosthodont Rest Dent. 2 (2016) 101–104.

[32] R. Pandey, Photopolymers in 3D printing applications, Photopolymers 3D Print. Appl.

48

(2014).

[33] L. Ferrage, G. Bertrand, P. Lenormand, D. Grossin, B. Ben-Nissan, A review of the

additive manufacturing (3DP) of bioceramics: Alumina, zirconia (PSZ) and

hydroxyapatite, J. Aust. Ceram. Soc. 53 (2017) 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41779-

016-0003-9.

[34] A. Dawood, B.M. Marti, V. Sauret-Jackson, A. Darwood, 3D printing in dentistry, Br.

Dent. J. 219 (2015) 521–529. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2015.914.

[35] B.E. Kelly, I. Bhattacharya, H. Heidari, M. Shusteff, C.M. Spadaccini, H.K. Taylor,

Volumetric additive manufacturing via tomographic reconstruction, Science (80-. ). 363

(2019) 1075–1079. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau7114.

[36] A.J. Hart, A. Rao, How to print a 3D object all at once, Science (80-. ). 363 (2019) 1042–

1043. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaw7062.

[37] P. Fiedor, J. Ortyl, A new approach to micromachining: High-precision and innovative

additive manufacturing solutions based on photopolymerization technology, Materials

(Basel). 13 (2020) 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13132951.

[38] D. Fan, Y. Li, X. Wang, T. Zhu, Q. Wang, H. Cai, W. Li, Y. Tian, Z. Liu, Progressive

3D printing technology and its application in medical materials, Front. Pharmacol. 11

(2020).

[39] A. Sakly, S. Kenzari, D. Bonina, S. Corbel, V. Fournée, A novel quasicrystal-resin

composite for stereolithography, Mater. Des. 56 (2014) 280–285.

[40] J.R. Tumbleston, D. Shirvanyants, N. Ermoshkin, R. Janusziewicz, A.R. Johnson, D.

Kelly, K. Chen, R. Pinschmidt, J.P. Rolland, A. Ermoshkin, Continuous liquid interface

production of 3D objects, Science (80-. ). 347 (2015) 1349–1352.

[41] R. Noorani, 3D printing: technology, applications, and selection, CRC Press, 2017.

[42] P. Aly, C. Mohsen, Comparison of the Accuracy of Three-Dimensional Printed Casts,

Digital, and Conventional Casts: An In Vitro Study, Eur. J. Dent. 14 (2020) 189.

[43] J. Bustillos, D. Montero‐Zambrano, A. Loganathan, B. Boesl, A. Agarwal,

Stereolithography‐based 3D printed photosensitive polymer/boron nitride nanoplatelets

composites, Polym. Compos. 40 (2019) 379–388.

[44] R. França, J. Winkler, H.H. Hsu, M. Rahimnejad, Z. Abdali, 3D Printing—Additive

Manufacturing of Dental Biomaterials, Dent. Biomater. 2 (2018) 421.

[45] Y. Pan, C. Zhou, Y. Chen, A Fast Mask Projection Stereolithography Process for

Fabricating Digital Models in Minutes, J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 134 (2012) 051011.

https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4007465.

[46] C. Sun, N. Fang, D.M. Wu, X. Zhang, Projection micro-stereolithography using digital

micro-mirror dynamic mask, Sensors Actuators A Phys. 121 (2005) 113–120.

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2004.12.011.

[47] L. Ge, L. Dong, D. Wang, Q. Ge, G. Gu, A digital light processing 3D printer for fast

and high-precision fabrication of soft pneumatic actuators, Sensors Actuators A Phys.

273 (2018) 285–292. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2018.02.041.

[48] Y. Lu, G. Mapili, G. Suhali, S. Chen, K. Roy, A digital micro-mirror device-based

49

system for the microfabrication of complex, spatially patterned tissue engineering

scaffolds, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A. 77A (2006) 396–405.

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.30601.

[49] Y. He, Y. Wu, J. Fu, Q. Gao, J. Qiu, Developments of 3D Printing Microfluidics and

Applications in Chemistry and Biology: a Review, Electroanalysis. 28 (2016) 1658–

1678. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201600043.

[50] Z. Zhang, P. Li, F. Chu, G. Shen, Influence of the three-dimensional printing technique

and printing layer thickness on model accuracy, J. Orofac. Orthop. / Fortschritte Der

Kieferorthopädie. 80 (2019) 194–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-019-00180-y.

[51] A. Bagheri Saed, A.H. Behravesh, S. Hasannia, S.A. Alavinasab Ardebili, B. Akhoundi,

M. Pourghayoumi, Functionalized poly l-lactic acid synthesis and optimization of

process parameters for 3D printing of porous scaffolds via digital light processing (DLP)

method, J. Manuf. Process. 56 (2020) 550–561.

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.04.076.

[52] H. Quan, T. Zhang, H. Xu, S. Luo, J. Nie, X. Zhu, Photo-curing 3D printing technique

and its challenges, Bioact. Mater. 5 (2020) 110–115.

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2019.12.003.

[53] J.W. Koo, J.S. Ho, J. An, Y. Zhang, C.K. Chua, T.H. Chong, A review on spacers and

membranes: Conventional or hybrid additive manufacturing?, Water Res. 188 (2021)

116497. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2020.116497.

[54] Digital Light Processing, DLP, https://www.manufacturingguide.com/en/ (accessed

December 7, 2020).

[55] P. Jain, A.M. Kuthe, Feasibility study of manufacturing using rapid prototyping: FDM

approach, Procedia Eng. 63 (2013) 4–11.

[56] E. Cuan-Urquizo, E. Barocio, V. Tejada-Ortigoza, R.B. Pipes, C.A. Rodriguez, A.

Roman-Flores, Characterization of the mechanical properties of FFF structures and

materials: A review on the experimental, computational and theoretical approaches,

Materials (Basel). 12 (2019) 895.

[57] E.S. Heras, F.B. Haro, J.M. de A. del Burgo, M.E.I. Marcos, Plate auto-level system for

fused deposition modelling (FDM) 3D printers, Rapid Prototyp. J. (2017).

[58] A.C. Taylor, S. Beirne, G. Alici, G.G. Wallace, System and process development for

coaxial extrusion in fused deposition modelling, Rapid Prototyp. J. (2017).

[59] A. Arnesano, S. Kunjalukkal Padmanabhan, A. Notarangelo, F. Montagna, A. Licciulli,

Fused deposition modeling shaping of glass infiltrated alumina for dental restoration,

Ceram. Int. 46 (2020) 2206–2212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.09.205.

[60] E.O. Olakanmi, R.F. Cochrane, K.W. Dalgarno, A review on selective laser

sintering/melting (SLS/SLM) of aluminium alloy powders: Processing, microstructure,

and properties, Prog. Mater. Sci. 74 (2015) 401–477.

[61] Y. Okazaki, A. Ishino, Microstructures and Mechanical Properties of Laser-Sintered

Commercially Pure Ti and Ti-6Al-4V Alloy for Dental Applications, Materials (Basel).

13 (2020) 609.

[62] O. Alageel, M. Abdallah, A. Alsheghri, J. Song, E. Caron, F. Tamimi, Removable partial

50

denture alloys processed by laser‐sintering technique, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part B

Appl. Biomater. 106 (2018) 1174–1185.

[63] M.A. Alhnan, T.C. Okwuosa, M. Sadia, K.-W. Wan, W. Ahmed, B. Arafat, Emergence

of 3D printed dosage forms: opportunities and challenges, Pharm. Res. 33 (2016) 1817–

1832.

[64] O. Alageel, M.N. Abdallah, A. Alsheghri, J. Song, E. Caron, F. Tamimi, Removable

partial denture alloys processed by laser-sintering technique, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. -

Part B Appl. Biomater. 106 (2018) 1174–1185. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.33929.

[65] U. Lakshminarayan, S. Ogrydiziak, H.L. Marcus, Selective laser sintering of ceramic

materials, in: 1990 Int. Solid Free. Fabr. Symp., 1990.

[66] Z. Chen, Z. Li, J. Li, C. Liu, C. Lao, Y. Fu, C. Liu, Y. Li, P. Wang, Y. He, 3D printing

of ceramics: A review, J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 39 (2019) 661–687.

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2018.11.013.

[67] M. Wohlert, D. Bourell, Rapid prototyping of Mg/SiC composites by a combined SLS

and pressureless infiltration process, in: 1996 Int. Solid Free. Fabr. Symp., 1996.

[68] S.S. Leong, Y.W. Yee, W.F. Edith, T.B. Yen, Z. Ziqiang, Z. Lin, T. Zhiling, Y.

Shoufeng, Direct selective laser sintering and melting of ceramics: a review, Rapid

Prototyp. J. 23 (2017) 611–623. https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-11-2015-0178.

[69] H. Lipson, M. Kurman, Fabricated: The new world of 3D printing, John Wiley & Sons,

2013.

[70] J.W. Stansbury, M.J. Idacavage, 3D printing with polymers: Challenges among

expanding options and opportunities, Dent. Mater. 32 (2016) 54–64.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2015.09.018.

[71] A. Mostafaei, E.L. Stevens, J.J. Ference, D.E. Schmidt, M. Chmielus, Binder Jet

Printing of Partial Denture Metal, Mater. Sci. Technol. 2017 (2017) 289–291.

https://doi.org/10.7449/2017/MST.

[72] C. Yu, J. Schimelman, P. Wang, K.L. Miller, X. Ma, S. You, J. Guan, B. Sun, W. Zhu,

S. Chen, Photopolymerizable Biomaterials and Light-Based 3D Printing Strategies for

Biomedical Applications, Chem. Rev. (2020).

[73] F.G. Mangano, P.A. Zecca, R. van Noort, S. Apresyan, G. Iezzi, A. Piattelli, A. Macchi,

C. Mangano, Custom-made computer-aided-design/computer-aided-manufacturing

biphasic calcium-phosphate scaffold for augmentation of an atrophic mandibular

anterior ridge, Case Rep. Dent. 2015 (2015).

[74] S.F.S. Shirazi, S. Gharehkhani, M. Mehrali, H. Yarmand, H.S.C. Metselaar, N.A. Kadri,

N.A.A. Osman, A review on powder-based additive manufacturing for tissue

engineering: selective laser sintering and inkjet 3D printing, Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater.

16 (2015) 33502.

[75] A. Dawood, B.M. Marti, Sauret-Jackson V, Darwood A. 3D Printing in Dentistry Brit.,

Br Dent J. 219 (2015) 521–529.

[76] K. V Wong, A. Hernandez, A review of additive manufacturing, ISRN Mech, Eng. 1

(2012) 1–10.

[77] S. Nayar, S. Bhuminathan, W.M. Bhat, Rapid prototyping and stereolithography in

51

dentistry, J. Pharm. Bioallied Sci. 7 (2015) S216.

[78] S.S. Bammani, P.R. Birajdar, S.S. Metan, Dental crown manufacturing using

stereolithography method, in: Proc. Int. Conf. Adv. Ind. Prod. Eng., Citeseer, 2012.

[79] G.S. Jacob, Three-dimensional printing of dentures using fused deposition modeling,

Insid. Dent. Technol. 4 (2013).

[80] J. Jockusch, M. Özcan, Additive manufacturing of dental polymers : An overview on

processes , materials and applications, Dent. Mater. J. (2020).

https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2019-123.

[81] N. Sathishkumar, A.S.M. Udayakumar, B. Vincent, V.A. Kumar, Study and Analysis of

3D Printed FDM Components by Non-Destructive Testing Techniques, Int. J. Res. Rev.

7 (2020).

[82] M. Harris, J. Potgieter, R. Archer, K.M. Arif, Effect of material and process specific

factors on the strength of printed parts in fused filament fabrication: A review of recent

developments, Materials (Basel). 12 (2019) 1664.

[83] A.K. Miri, E. Mostafavi, D. Khorsandi, S.-K. Hu, M. Malpica, A. Khademhosseini,

Bioprinters for organs-on-chips, Biofabrication. 11 (2019) 42002.

[84] H.B. Yamak, Emulsion polymerization: effects of polymerization variables on the

properties of vinyl acetate based emulsion polymers, in: Polym. Sci., IntechOpen, 2013.

[85] A. Echte, Rubber-toughened styrene polymers: A review, in: ACS Publications, 1989.

[86] C.A. Ponyik, D.T. Wu, S.K.R. Williams, Separation and composition distribution

determination of triblock copolymers by thermal field-flow fractionation, Anal. Bioanal.

Chem. 405 (2013) 9033–9040.

[87] Z.A.A. Halim, M.A.M. Yajid, M.H. Idris, H. Hamdan, Dispersion of polymeric-coated-

silica aerogel particles in unsaturated polyester composites: effects on thermal-

mechanical properties, J. Dispers. Sci. Technol. 39 (2018) 1093–1101.

[88] S.D. Jensen, Thermoplastic/Thermoset Dental Restorative Prosthetics, (2009).

[89] S.L. Messimer, T. Rocha Pereira, A.E. Patterson, M. Lubna, F.O. Drozda, Full-density

fused deposition modeling dimensional error as a function of raster angle and build

orientation: Large dataset for eleven materials, J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 3 (2019) 6.

[90] M. Šimková, A. Tichý, M. Dušková, P. Bradna, Dental composites - a low-dose source

of bisphenol A?, Physiol. Res. 69 (2020) S295–S304.

https://doi.org/10.33549/physiolres.934518.

[91] S.A. Park, H.-J. Lee, K.-S. Kim, S.J. Lee, J.-T. Lee, S.-Y. Kim, N.-H. Chang, S.-Y. Park,

In vivo evaluation of 3D-printed polycaprolactone scaffold implantation combined with

β-TCP powder for alveolar bone augmentation in a beagle defect model, Materials

(Basel). 11 (2018) 238.

[92] E.A.M. Hassan, S.E. Elarabi, Y. Wei, M. Yu, Biodegradable poly (lactic acid)/poly

(butylene succinate) fibers with high elongation for health care products, Text. Res. J.

88 (2018) 1735–1744.

[93] S. Khan, S. Ali, A. Bermak, Recent developments in printing flexible and wearable

sensing electronics for healthcare applications, Sensors. 19 (2019) 1230.

52

[94] O.T. David, C. Szuhanek, R.A. Tuce, A.P. David, M. Leretter, Polylactic acid 3D

printed drill guide for dental implants using CBCT, Rev. Chim.-Bucharest. 68 (2017)

341–342.

[95] P. Molinero-Mourelle, S. Canals, M. Gómez-Polo, M. Fernanda Solá-Ruiz, J. del Río

Highsmith, A. Celemín Viñuela, M.F. Solá-Ruiz, A.C. Viñuela, Polylactic Acid as a

Material for Three-Dimensional Printing of Provisional Restorations., Int. J.

Prosthodont. 31 (2018).

[96] E. Neiva, S. Badia, A.F. Martín, M. Chiumenti, A scalable parallel finite element

framework for growing geometries. Application to metal additive manufacturing, Int. J.

Numer. Methods Eng. 119 (2019) 1098–1125.

[97] T. Debroy, T. Mukherjee, J.O. Milewski, J.W. Elmer, B. Ribic, J.J. Blecher, W. Zhang,

Scientific, technological and economic issues in metal printing and their solutions, Nat.

Mater. (2019) 1.

[98] L. Kunčická, R. Kocich, T.C. Lowe, Advances in metals and alloys for joint

replacement, Prog. Mater. Sci. 88 (2017) 232–280.

[99] C.-W. Kang, F.-Z. Fang, State of the art of bioimplants manufacturing: part I, Adv.

Manuf. 6 (2018) 20–40.

[100] G. Struzikiewicz, W. Zębala, A. Matras, M. Machno, Ł. Ślusarczyk, S. Hichert, F.

Laufer, Turning research of additive laser molten stainless steel 316L obtained by 3D

printing, Materials (Basel). 12 (2019) 182.

[101] M.Z. Ibrahim, A.A.D. Sarhan, T.Y. Kuo, F. Yusof, M. Hamdi, Characterization and

hardness enhancement of amorphous Fe-based metallic glass laser cladded on nickel-

free stainless steel for biomedical implant application, Mater. Chem. Phys. 235 (2019)

121745.

[102] G. Singh, A. Saini, Developments in Metallic Biomaterials and Surface Coatings for

Various Biomedical Applications, in: Adv. Mater. Process., Springer, 2020: pp. 197–

206.

[103] M. Talha, C.K. Behera, O.P. Sinha, A review on nickel-free nitrogen containing

austenitic stainless steels for biomedical applications, Mater. Sci. Eng. C. 33 (2013)

3563–3575.

[104] Q. Chen, G.A. Thouas, Metallic implant biomaterials, Mater. Sci. Eng. R Reports. 87

(2015) 1–57.

[105] N.S. Manam, W.S.W. Harun, D.N.A. Shri, S.A.C. Ghani, T. Kurniawan, M.H. Ismail,

M.H.I. Ibrahim, Study of corrosion in biocompatible metals for implants: A review, J.

Alloys Compd. 701 (2017) 698–715.

[106] M. Liu, C. Li, L. Liu, Y. Ye, D. Dastan, H. Garmestani, Inhibition of stress corrosion

cracking in 304 stainless steel through titanium ion implantation, Mater. Sci. Technol.

36 (2020) 284–292.

[107] L. Zhao, X. Pei, L. Jiang, C. Hu, J. Sun, F. Xing, C. Zhou, Y. Fan, X. Zhang, Bionic

design and 3D printing of porous titanium alloy scaffolds for bone tissue repair,

Compos. Part B Eng. 162 (2019) 154–161.

[108] S.C. Kim, W.L. Jo, Y.S. Kim, S.Y. Kwon, Y.S. Cho, Y.W. Lim, Titanium Powder

53

Coating Using Metal 3D Printing: A Novel Coating Technology for Cobalt–Chromium

Alloy Implants, Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 16 (2019) 11–18.

[109] X. Chen, K. Shah, S. Dong, L. Peterson, E.C. La Plante, G. Sant, Elucidating the

corrosion-related degradation mechanisms of a Ti-6Al-4V dental implant, Dent. Mater.

36 (2020) 431–441.

[110] J. W Nicholson, Titanium Alloys for Dental Implants: A Review, Prosthesis. 2 (2020)

100–116.

[111] H.M. Hamza, K.M. Deen, W. Haider, Microstructural examination and corrosion

behavior of selective laser melted and conventionally manufactured Ti6Al4V for dental

applications, Mater. Sci. Eng. C. (2020) 110980.

[112] O.P. Gbenebor, Potentials of Polylactide-Chitin Composites as Femoral Scaffold in

Orthopaedics, (2017).

[113] C. Veiga, J.P. Davim, A.J.R. Loureiro, Properties and applications of titanium alloys: a

brief review, Rev. Adv. Mater. Sci. 32 (2012) 133–148.

[114] Y. Okazaki, E. Gotoh, Comparison of fatigue strengths of biocompatible Ti-15Zr-4Nb-

4Ta alloy and other titanium materials, Mater. Sci. Eng. C. 31 (2011) 325–333.

[115] L. Hitzler, J. von Kobylinski, R. Lawitzki, C. Krempaszky, E. Werner, Microstructural

Development and Mechanical Properties of Selective Laser Melted Co–Cr–W Dental

Alloy, in: TMS 2020 149th Annu. Meet. Exhib. Suppl. Proc., Springer, 2020: pp. 195–

202.

[116] M. Lowther, S. Louth, A. Davey, A. Hussain, P. Ginestra, L. Carter, N. Eisenstein, L.

Grover, S. Cox, Clinical, industrial, and research perspectives on powder bed fusion

additively manufactured metal implants, Addit. Manuf. 28 (2019) 565–584.

[117] X. Li, X. Liu, S. Wu, K.W.K. Yeung, Y. Zheng, P.K. Chu, Design of magnesium alloys

with controllable degradation for biomedical implants: From bulk to surface, Acta

Biomater. 45 (2016) 2–30.

[118] G. Negroni, Corrosion and tribocorrosion study of CoCrMo biomedical alloys, Politesi-

Polimi. (2014).

[119] H. Li, H. Yang, Y. Zheng, F. Zhou, K. Qiu, X. Wang, Design and characterizations of

novel biodegradable ternary Zn-based alloys with IIA nutrient alloying elements Mg,

Ca and Sr, Mater. Des. 83 (2015) 95–102.

[120] A. Ziębowicz, K. Matus, W. Pakieła, G. Matula, M. Pawlyta, Comparison of the Crystal

Structure and Wear Resistance of Co-Based Alloys with Low Carbon Content

Manufactured by Selective Laser Sintering and Powder Injection Molding, Crystals. 10

(2020) 197.

[121] Y.S. Al Jabbari, Physico-mechanical properties and prosthodontic applications of Co-

Cr dental alloys: a review of the literature, J. Adv. Prosthodont. 6 (2014) 138–145.

[122] H.R. Kim, S.-H. Jang, Y.K. Kim, J.S. Son, B.K. Min, K.-H. Kim, T.-Y. Kwon,

Microstructures and mechanical properties of Co-Cr dental alloys fabricated by three

CAD/CAM-based processing techniques, Materials (Basel). 9 (2016) 596.

[123] N.H. Mat-Baharin, M. Razali, S. Mohd-Said, J. Syarif, A. Muchtar, Influence of alloying

elements on cellular response and in-vitro corrosion behavior of titanium-molybdenum-

54

chromium alloys for implant materials, J. Prosthodont. Res. (2020).

[124] P. Hu, Improvement in Metal-on-Metal Bearing of Hip Implants with Advanced Stellite

Alloys, (2013).

[125] N.R. Reddy, A.P. Abraham, K. Murugesan, V. Matsa, An Invitro Analysis of Elemental

Release and Cytotoxicity of Recast Nickel–Chromium Dental Casting Alloys, J. Indian

Prosthodont. Soc. 11 (2011) 106–112.

[126] B. Konieczny, A. Szczesio-Wlodarczyk, J. Sokolowski, K. Bociong, Challenges of Co–

Cr Alloy Additive Manufacturing Methods in Dentistry—The Current State of

Knowledge (Systematic Review), Materials (Basel). 13 (2020) 3524.

[127] B. Henriques, D. Soares, F.S. Silva, Microstructure, hardness, corrosion resistance and

porcelain shear bond strength comparison between cast and hot pressed CoCrMo alloy

for metal–ceramic dental restorations, J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. (182).Ris. 12

(2012) 83–92.

[128] G. Manivasagam, D. Dhinasekaran, A. Rajamanickam, Biomedical implants: corrosion

and its prevention-a review., Recent Patents Corros. Sci. (2010).

[129] Y.S. Al Jabbari, T. Koutsoukis, X. Barmpagadaki, S. Zinelis, Metallurgical and

interfacial characterization of PFM Co–Cr dental alloys fabricated via casting, milling

or selective laser melting, Dent. Mater. 30 (2014) e79–e88.

[130] T. Koutsoukis, S. Zinelis, G. Eliades, K. Al‐Wazzan, M. Al Rifaiy, Y.S. Al Jabbari,

Selective laser melting technique of Co‐Cr dental alloys: a review of structure and

properties and comparative analysis with other available techniques, J. Prosthodont. 24

(2015) 303–312.

[131] B. Qian, K. Saeidi, L. Kvetková, F. Lofaj, C. Xiao, Z. Shen, Defects-tolerant Co-Cr-Mo

dental alloys prepared by selective laser melting, Dent. Mater. 31 (2015) 1435–1444.

[132] X.Z. Xin, N. Xiang, J. Chen, B. Wei, In vitro biocompatibility of Co–Cr alloy fabricated

by selective laser melting or traditional casting techniques, Mater. Lett. 88 (2012) 101–

103.

[133] H. Li, L. Song, J. Sun, J. Ma, Z. Shen, Dental ceramic prostheses by stereolithography-

based additive manufacturing: potentials and challenges, Adv. Appl. Ceram. 118 (2019)

30–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17436753.2018.1447834.

[134] R. Galante, C.G. Figueiredo-Pina, A.P. Serro, Additive manufacturing of ceramics for

dental applications: A review, Dent. Mater. 35 (2019) 825–846.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2019.02.026.

[135] J. Han, J. Zhao, Z.S.-A. in A. Ceramics, undefined 2017, Zirconia ceramics in metal-

free implant dentistry, Taylor Fr. (n.d.).

[136] C.-H. Li, C.-H. Wu, C.-L. Lin, Design of a patient-specific mandible reconstruction

implant with dental prosthesis for metal 3D printing using integrated weighted topology

optimization and finite element analysis, J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 105 (2020)

103700.

[137] M. Bollman, R. Malbrue, C. Li, H. Yao, S. Guo, S. Yao, Improvement of

osseointegration by recruiting stem cells to titanium implants fabricated with 3D

printing, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1463 (2020) 37–44.

55

[138] C.-S. Chen, J.-H. Chang, V. Srimaneepong, J.-Y. Wen, O.-H. Tung, C.-H. Yang, H.-C.

Lin, T.-H. Lee, Y. Han, H.-H. Huang, Improving the in vitro cell differentiation and in

vivo osseointegration of titanium dental implant through oxygen plasma immersion ion

implantation treatment, Surf. Coatings Technol. (2020) 126125.

[139] Y. Doe, H. Ida, M. Seiryu, T. Deguchi, N. Takeshita, S. Sasaki, S. Sasaki, D. Irie, K.

Tsuru, K. Ishikawa, Titanium surface treatment by calcium modification with acid-

etching promotes osteogenic activity and stability of dental implants, Materialia. (2020)

100801.

[140] A. Noro, M. Kaneko, I. Murata, M. Yoshinari, Influence of surface topography and

surface physicochemistry on wettability of zirconia (tetragonal zirconia polycrystal), J.

Biomed. Mater. Res. - Part B Appl. Biomater. 101 B (2013) 355–363.

https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.32846.

[141] S. Schultze-Mosgau, H.S.-O. Surgery, undefined Oral, undefined 2000,

Osseointegration of endodontic endosseous conesZirconium oxide vs titanium, Elsevier.

(n.d.).

[142] M. Hisbergues, S. Vendeville, P. Vendeville, Review Zirconia : Established Facts and

Perspectives for a Biomaterial in Dental Implantology, (2008) 519–529.

https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.31147.

[143] A.E. Rodriguez, M. Monzavi, C.L. Yokoyama, H. Nowzari, Zirconia dental implants:

A clinical and radiographic evaluation, J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 30 (2018) 538–544.

[144] G.P. Jayaswal, S.P. Dange, A.N. Khalikar, Bioceramic in dental implants: A review, J.

Indian Prosthodont. Soc. 10 (2010) 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13191-010-0002-4.

[145] R. Barkallah, R. Taktak, N. Guermazi, K. Elleuch, Mechanical properties and wear

behaviour of alumina / tricalcium phosphate / titania ceramics as coating for orthopedic

implant, Eng. Fract. Mech. (2020) 107399.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.107399.

[146] A. De Aza, J. Chevalier, G. Fantozzi, M.S.- Biomaterials, undefined 2002, Crack

growth resistance of alumina, zirconia and zirconia toughened alumina ceramics for

joint prostheses, Elsevier. (n.d.).

[147] A. Shenoy, N.S.-J. of conservative dentistry: JCD, undefined 2010, Dental ceramics:

An update, Ncbi.Nlm.Nih.Gov. (n.d.).

[148] T.A. Khabas, L. V Maletina, K.S. Kamyshnaya, Influence of nanopowders and pore-

forming additives on sintering of alumma-zircorna ceramics Related content Influence

of nanopowders and pore-forming additives on sintering of alumina-zirconia ceramics,

Iopscience.Iop.Org. (n.d.). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/66/1/012050.

[149] Y. Zhang, Y. Yang, W. Li, Y. Ren, Effect of Al2O3 Addition on the Flexural Strength

and Light-Transmission Properties of Bone China, Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 12

(2015) 875–884. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijac.12296.

[150] A. Bruni, F.G. Serra, A. Deregibus, T. Castroflorio, Shape-memory polymers in

dentistry: Systematic review and patent landscape report, Materials (Basel). 12 (2019)

1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12142216.

[151] Y.Y.C. Choong, S. Maleksaeedi, H. Eng, J. Wei, P.-C. Su, 4D printing of high

performance shape memory polymer using stereolithography, Mater. Des. 126 (2017)

56

219–225.

[152] W. Sun, B. Starly, A.C. Daly, J.A. Burdick, J. Groll, G. Skeldon, W. Shu, Y. Sakai, M.

Shinohara, M. Nishikawa, The bioprinting roadmap, Biofabrication. 12 (2020) 22002.

[153] M. Behl, A. Lendlein, Shape-memory polymers, Mater. Today. 10 (2007) 20–28.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-7021(07)70047-0.

[154] E.N. Zare, R. Jamaledin, P. Naserzadeh, E. Afjeh-Dana, B. Ashtari, M. Hosseinzadeh,

R. Vecchione, A. Wu, F.R. Tay, A. Borzacchiello, P. Makvandi, Metal-Based

Nanostructures/PLGA Nanocomposites: Antimicrobial Activity, Cytotoxicity, and

Their Biomedical Applications, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 12 (2020) 3279–3300.

https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b19435.

[155] E.N. Zare, M.M. Lakouraj, A. Ramezani, Effective Adsorption of Heavy Metal Cations

by Superparamagnetic Poly(aniline-co-m-

phenylenediamine)@Fe<inf>3</inf>O<inf>4</inf>

Nanocomposite, Adv. Polym. Technol. 34 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1002/adv.21501.

[156] E. Nazarzadeh Zare, M.M. Lakouraj, M. Baghayeri, Electro-magnetic polyfuran/Fe3O4

nanocomposite: Synthesis, characterization, antioxidant activity, and its application as

a biosensor, Int. J. Polym. Mater. Polym. Biomater. 64 (2015) 175–183.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00914037.2014.936588.

[157] R. Zare, Ehsan Nazarzadeh Lakouraj, Moslem Mansour Moghadam, Peyman Najafi

Azimi, Novel Polyfuran/Functionalized Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes Composites

With Improved Conductivity: Chemical Synthesis, Characterization, and Antioxidant

Activity, Polym. Compos. 34 (2013) 732–739.

[158] H. Hingorani, Y.-F. Zhang, B. Zhang, A. Serjouei, Q. Ge, Modified commercial UV

curable elastomers for passive 4D printing, Int. J. Smart Nano Mater. 10 (2019) 225–

236.

[159] H. Cui, S. Miao, T. Esworthy, S. Lee, X. Zhou, S.Y. Hann, T.J. Webster, B.T. Harris,

L.G. Zhang, A novel near-infrared light responsive 4D printed nanoarchitecture with

dynamically and remotely controllable transformation, Nano Res. 12 (2019) 1381–1388.

[160] T. Manouras, M. Vamvakaki, Field responsive materials: photo-, electro-, magnetic-and

ultrasound-sensitive polymers, Polym. Chem. 8 (2017) 74–96.

[161] A.-Z. Zardad, Y.E. Choonara, L.C. Du Toit, P. Kumar, M. Mabrouk, P.P.D. Kondiah,

V. Pillay, A review of thermo-and ultrasound-responsive polymeric systems for delivery

of chemotherapeutic agents, Polymers (Basel). 8 (2016) 359.

[162] P. Makvandi, G.W. Ali, F. Della Sala, W.I. Abdel-Fattah, A. Borzacchiello, Hyaluronic

acid/corn silk extract based injectable nanocomposite: a biomimetic antibacterial

scaffold for bone tissue regeneration, Mater. Sci. Eng. C. 107 (2019) 10195.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2019.110195.

[163] P. Makvandi, G.W. Ali, F. Della Sala, W.I. Abdel-Fattah, A. Borzacchiello,

Biosynthesis and characterization of antibacterial thermosensitive hydrogels based on

corn silk extract, hyaluronic acid and nanosilver for potential wound healing,

Carbohydr. Polym. 223 (2019) 115023.

[164] S. Miao, N. Castro, M. Nowicki, L. Xia, H. Cui, X. Zhou, W. Zhu, S. jun Lee, K. Sarkar,

G. Vozzi, Y. Tabata, J. Fisher, L.G. Zhang, 4D printing of polymeric materials for tissue

57

and organ regeneration, Mater. Today. 20 (2017) 577–591.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2017.06.005.

[165] F. Reyes-Ortega, 3 - pH-responsive polymers: properties, synthesis and applications, in:

M.R. Aguilar, J.B.T.-S.P. and their A. San Román (Eds.), Smart Polym. Their Appl.,

Woodhead Publishing, 2014: pp. 45–92.

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857097026.1.45.

[166] A. Muzaffar, M.B. Ahamed, K. Deshmukh, T. Kovářík, T. Křenek, S.K.K. Pasha, 3D

and 4D printing of pH-responsive and functional polymers and their composites, in: 3D

4D Print. Polym. Nanocomposite Mater., Elsevier, 2020: pp. 85–117.

[167] E.N. Zare, P. Makvandi, F.R. Tay, Recent progress in the industrial and biomedical

applications of tragacanth gum, Carbohydr. Polym. 212 (2019) 450–467.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CARBPOL.2019.02.076.

[168] E. Pei, G.H. Loh, Technological considerations for 4D printing: an overview, Prog.

Addit. Manuf. 3 (2018) 95–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40964-018-0047-1.

[169] M. Javaid, A. Haleem, 4D printing applications in medical field: A brief review, Clin.

Epidemiol. Glob. Heal. 7 (2019) 317–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cegh.2018.09.007.

[170] L. Zhang, E.-M. Haddouti, K. Welle, C. Burger, K. Kabir, F.A. Schildberg, Local

Cellular Responses to Metallic and Ceramic Nanoparticles from Orthopedic Joint

Arthroplasty Implants, Int. J. Nanomedicine. 15 (2020) 6705.

[171] Y. Liu, B. Rath, M. Tingart, J. Eschweiler, Role of implants surface modification in

osseointegration: A systematic review, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A. 108 (2020) 470–

484.

[172] A. Dreanca, C. Sarosi, A.E. Parvu, M. Blidaru, G. Enacrachi, R. Purdoiu, A. Nagy, B.

Sevastre, N.A. Oros, I. Marcus, Systemic and Local Biocompatibility Assessment of

Graphene Composite Dental Materials in Experimental Mandibular Bone Defect,

Materials (Basel). 13 (2020) 2511.

[173] S. Zafar, A. Siddiqi, Biological responses to pediatric stainless steel crowns, J. Oral Sci.

(2020) 20–83.

[174] A. V Tibau, B.D. Grube, B.J. Velez, V.M. Vega, J. Mutter, Titanium exposure and

human health, Oral Sci. Int. 16 (2019) 15–24.

[175] S.T. Kumar, S.P. Devi, C. Krithika, R.N. Raghavan, Review of metallic biomaterials in

dental applications, J. Pharm. Bioallied Sci. 12 (2020) S14.

[176] M. Moldovan, R. Balazsi, A. Soanca, A. Roman, C. Sarosi, D. Prodan, M. Vlassa, I.

Cojocaru, V. Saceleanu, I. Cristescu, Evaluation of the degree of conversion, residual

monomers and mechanical properties of some light-cured dental resin composites,

Materials (Basel). 12 (2019) 2109.

[177] J. Chen, R. Ahmad, H. Suenaga, W. Li, K. Sasaki, M. Swain, Q. Li, Shape optimization

for additive manufacturing of removable partial dentures-a new paradigm for prosthetic

CAD/CAM, PLoS One. 10 (2015).

[178] M. Cassetta, S. Di Carlo, N. Pranno, V. Sorrentino, G. Di Giorgio, G. Pompa, The use

of stereolithographic surgical templates in oral implantology, Ann Ital Chir. 84 (2013)

589–593.

58

[179] T. Dikova, Production of high-quality temporary crowns and bridges by

stereolithography, Scr. Sci. Med. Dent. 5 (2019) 33–38.

[180] M. Cassetta, Immediate loading of implants inserted in edentulous arches using multiple

mucosa-supported stereolithographic surgical templates: a 10-year prospective cohort

study, Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 45 (2016) 526–534.

[181] O. Ozan, I. Turkyilmaz, A.E. Ersoy, E.A. McGlumphy, S.F. Rosenstiel, Clinical

accuracy of 3 different types of computed tomography-derived stereolithographic

surgical guides in implant placement, J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 67 (2009) 394–401.

[182] J. D’haese, T. Van De Velde, A. Komiyama, M. Hultin, H. De Bruyn, Accuracy and

complications using computer‐designed stereolithographic surgical guides for oral

rehabilitation by means of dental implants: a review of the literature, Clin. Implant Dent.

Relat. Res. 14 (2012) 321–335.

[183] M. Shahbazian, R. Jacobs, J. Wyatt, G. Willems, V. Pattijn, E. Dhoore, C. Van Lierde,

F. Vinckier, Accuracy and surgical feasibility of a CBCT‐based stereolithographic

surgical guide aiding autotransplantation of teeth: in vitro validation, J. Oral Rehabil. 37

(2010) 854–859.

[184] K. Liang, S. Carmone, D. Brambilla, J.C. Leroux, 3D printing of a wearable

personalized oral delivery device: A first-in-human study, Sci. Adv. 4 (2018) 1–12.

https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat2544.

[185] J. Chen, Z. Zhang, X. Chen, C. Zhang, G. Zhang, Z. Xu, Design and manufacture of

customized dental implants by using reverse engineering and selective laser melting

technology, J. Prosthet. Dent. 112 (2014) 1088–1095.

[186] F. Mangano, M. Bazzoli, L. Tettamanti, D. Farronato, M. Maineri, A. Macchi, C.

Mangano, Custom-made, selective laser sintering (SLS) blade implants as a non-

conventional solution for the prosthetic rehabilitation of extremely atrophied posterior

mandible, Lasers Med. Sci. 28 (2013) 1241–1247.

[187] M. Figliuzzi, F. Mangano, C. Mangano, A novel root analogue dental implant using CT

scan and CAD/CAM: selective laser melting technology, Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg.

41 (2012) 858–862.

[188] A. Jawahar, G. Maragathavalli, Applications of 3D Printing in Dentistry–A Review, J.

Pharm. Sci. Res. 11 (2019) 1670–1675.

[189] F. Alifui-Segbaya, S. Varma, G.J. Lieschke, R. George, Biocompatibility of

photopolymers in 3D printing, 3D Print. Addit. Manuf. 4 (2017) 185–191.

[190] E. Anadioti, B. Kane, E. Soulas, Current and emerging applications of 3D printing in

restorative dentistry, Curr. Oral Heal. Reports. 5 (2018) 133–139.

[191] A.C. Hayes, G.L. Whiting, Powder-Binder Jetting Large-Scale, Metal Direct-Drive

Generators: Selecting the Powder, Binder, and Process Parameters, in: ASME 2019

Power Conf., American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, 2019.

[192] R.B. Osman, N. Alharbi, D. Wismeijer, Build angle: does it influence the accuracy of

3D-printed dental restorations using digital light-processing technology?, Int. J.

Prosthodont. 30 (2017).

[193] W.-S. Lin, B.T. Harris, J. Pellerito, D. Morton, Fabrication of an interim complete

59

removable dental prosthesis with an in-office digital light processing three-dimensional

printer: a proof-of-concept technique, J. Prosthet. Dent. 120 (2018) 331–334.

[194] P. Gaind, Injuries to the Teeth: Long-Term Effects and Their Management, in: Atlas

Oper. Maxillofac. Trauma Surg., Springer, 2020: pp. 801–813.

[195] P. Makvandi, J.T. Gu, E.N. Zare, B. Ashtari, A. Moeini, F.R. Tay, L. Niu, Polymeric

and inorganic nanoscopical antimicrobial fillers in dentistry, Acta Biomater. 101 (2020)

69–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2019.09.025.

[196] M. Zimmermann, A. Ender, T. Attin, A. Mehl, Fracture load of three-unit full-contour

fixed dental prostheses fabricated with subtractive and additive CAD/CAM technology,

Clin. Oral Investig. 24 (2020) 1035–1042.

[197] H. Nishiyama, A. Taniguchi, S. Tanaka, K. Baba, Novel fully digital workflow for

removable partial denture fabrication, J. Prosthodont. Res. 64 (2020) 98–103.

[198] G.-S. Unsal, I. Turkyilmaz, S. Lakhia, Advantages and limitations of implant surgery

with CAD/CAM surgical guides: A literature review, J. Clin. Exp. Dent. 12 (2020) e409.

[199] M.T. Kattadiyil, C. Goodacre, N.Z. Baba, CAD/CAM complete dentures: a review of

two commercial fabrication systems., J. Calif. Dent. Assoc. 41 (2013) 407–416.

[200] M.O. Hussein, L.A. Hussein, Novel 3D Modeling Technique of Removable Partial

Denture Framework Manufactured by 3D Printing Technology, Int. J. Adv. Res. 2

(2014) 686–694.

[201] N.M. inaya Pereyra, J. Marano, G. Subramanian, S. Quek, D. Leff, Comparison of

patient satisfaction in the fabrication of conventional dentures vs. DENTCA

(CAD/CAM) dentures: a case report, J. N. J. Dent. Assoc. 86 (2015) 26–33.

[202] H. Kim, D. Lee, S. Young Lee, H. Yang, S.W. Park, H.P. Lim, K.D. Yun, C. Park,

Denture flask fabrication using fused deposition modeling three-dimensional printing,

J. Prosthodont. Res. 64 (2020) 231–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2019.07.001.

[203] A. Tahayeri, M. Morgan, A.P. Fugolin, D. Bompolaki, A. Athirasala, C.S. Pfeifer, J.L.

Ferracane, L.E. Bertassoni, 3D printed versus conventionally cured provisional crown

and bridge dental materials, Dent. Mater. 34 (2018) 192–200.

[204] Y. Etemad-Shahidi, O.B. Qallandar, J. Evenden, F. Alifui-Segbaya, K.E. Ahmed,

Accuracy of 3-Dimensionally Printed Full-Arch Dental Models: A Systematic Review,

J. Clin. Med. 9 (2020) 3357. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9103357.

[205] T. Hada, M. Kanazawa, M. Iwaki, T. Arakida, Y. Soeda, A. Katheng, R. Otake, S.

Minakuchi, Effect of printing direction on the accuracy of 3D-printed dentures using

stereolithography technology, Materials (Basel). 13 (2020) 1–12.

https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13153405.

[206] D. Seprianto, R. Sugiantoro, Siproni, Yahya, M. Erwin, The Effect of Rectangular

Parallel Key Manufacturing Process Parameters Made with Stereolithography DLP 3D

Printer Technology Against Impact Strength, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1500 (2020).

https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1500/1/012028.

[207] AM in dentistry report - 3D Printing Media Network, (n.d.).

[208] A. Barazanchi, K.C. Li, B. Al-Amleh, K. Lyons, J.N. Waddell, Additive Technology:

Update on Current Materials and Applications in Dentistry, J. Prosthodont. 26 (2017)

60

156–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12510.

[209] G. Oberoi, S. Nitsch, M. Edelmayer, K. Janjic, A.S. Müller, H. Agis, 3D printing-

Encompassing the facets of dentistry, Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 6 (2018) 1–13.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2018.00172.

[210] H.H. Lin, D. Lonic, L.J. Lo, 3D printing in orthognathic surgery − A literature review,

J. Formos. Med. Assoc. 117 (2018) 547–558.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfma.2018.01.008.

[211] J. D’haese, J. Ackhurst, D. Wismeijer, H. De Bruyn, A. Tahmaseb, Current state of the

art of computer-guided implant surgery, Periodontol. 2000. 73 (2017) 121–133.

https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12175.

[212] Y. Zhai, D.A. Lados, J.L. LaGoy, Additive manufacturing: making imagination the

major limitation, Jom. 66 (2014) 808–816.

[213] M. Revilla-León, M. Özcan, Additive Manufacturing Technologies Used for 3D Metal

Printing in Dentistry, Curr. Oral Heal. Reports. 4 (2017) 201–208.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40496-017-0152-0.

[214] R. Wauthle, J. Van Der Stok, S.A. Yavari, J. Van Humbeeck, J.P. Kruth, A.A. Zadpoor,

H. Weinans, M. Mulier, J. Schrooten, Additively manufactured porous tantalum

implants, Acta Biomater. 14 (2015) 217–225.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2014.12.003.

[215] A.M. Baciu, C. Bejinariu, A. Corăbieru, E. Mihalache, M. Lupu–Poliac, C. Baciu, E.R.

Baciu, Influence of process parameters for Selective Laser Melting on the roughness of

3D printed surfaces in Co-Cr dental alloy powder, in: IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng.,

IOP Publishing, 2019: p. 12054.

[216] S.O. Bajunaid, B. Altwaim, M. Alhassan, R. Alammari, The fit accuracy of removable

partial denture metal frameworks using conventional and 3D printed techniques: An in

vitro study, J. Contemp. Dent. Pract. 20 (2019) 476–481. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-

journals-10024-2542.

[217] H. Wang, K. Su, L. Su, P. Liang, P. Ji, C. Wang, Comparison of 3D-printed porous

tantalum and titanium scaffolds on osteointegration and osteogenesis, Mater. Sci. Eng.

C. 104 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2019.109908.

[218] P. Rider, Ž.P. Kačarević, S. Alkildani, S. Retnasingh, R. Schnettler, M. Barbeck,

Additive manufacturing for guided bone regeneration: A perspective for alveolar ridge

augmentation, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19113308.

[219] D. Nesic, B.M. Schaefer, Y. Sun, N. Saulacic, 3D Printing Approach in Dentistry : The

Future for Personalized Oral Soft Tissue Regeneration, J. Clin. Med. (2020).

[220] M. Salah, L. Tayebi, K. Moharamzadeh, F.B. Naini, Three-dimensional bio-printing and

bone tissue engineering: technical innovations and potential applications in

maxillofacial reconstructive surgery, Maxillofac. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 42 (2020).

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40902-020-00263-6.

[221] S. D’Ercole, M. Tieri, D. Fulco, D. Martinelli, D. Tripodi, The use of chlorhexidine in

mouthguards., J. Biol. Regul. Homeost. Agents. 31 (2017) 487–493.

[222] H.H.K. Xu, P. Wang, L. Wang, C. Bao, Q. Chen, M.D. Weir, L.C. Chow, L. Zhao, X.

61

Zhou, M.A. Reynolds, Calcium phosphate cements for bone engineering and their

biological properties, Bone Res. 5 (2017) 1–19.

[223] C. Byun, C. Kim, S. Cho, S.H. Baek, G. Kim, S.G. Kim, S.-Y. Kim, Endodontic

treatment of an anomalous anterior tooth with the aid of a 3-dimensional printed physical

tooth model, J. Endod. 41 (2015) 961–965.

[224] P. Shah, B.S. Chong, 3D imaging, 3D printing and 3D virtual planning in endodontics,

Clin. Oral Investig. 22 (2018) 641–654.

[225] J. Anderson, J. Wealleans, J. Ray, Endodontic applications of 3D printing, Int. Endod.

J. 51 (2018) 1005–1018. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12917.

[226] E. Kröger, M. Dekiff, D. Dirksen, 3D printed simulation models based on real patient

situations for hands‐on practice, Eur. J. Dent. Educ. 21 (2017) e119–e125.

[227] C. Höhne, M. Schmitter, 3D Printed Teeth for the Preclinical Education of Dental

Students, J. Dent. Educ. 83 (2019) 1100–1106. https://doi.org/10.21815/jde.019.103.

[228] M. Reymus, C. Fotiadou, A. Kessler, K. Heck, R. Hickel, C. Diegritz, 3D printed

replicas for endodontic education, Int. Endod. J. 52 (2019) 123–130.

https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12964.

[229] S.M. Werz, S.J. Zeichner, B. Berg, H. Zeilhofer, F. Thieringer, 3D printed surgical

simulation models as educational tool by maxillofacial surgeons, Eur. J. Dent. Educ. 22

(2018) e500–e505.

[230] J. Garcia, Z. Yang, R. Mongrain, R.L. Leask, K. Lachapelle, 3D printing materials and

their use in medical education: a review of current technology and trends for the future,

BMJ Simul. Technol. Enhanc. Learn. 4 (2018) 27–40.

[231] H.Y. Jeong, B.H. Woo, N. Kim, Y.C. Jun, Multicolor 4D printing of shape-memory

polymers for light-induced selective heating and remote actuation, Sci. Rep. 10 (2020)

1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-63020-9.

[232] A. Haleem, M. Javaid, Four-dimensional printing applications in dentistry, Curr. Med.

Res. Pract. 9 (2019) 41–42.

[233] R.O. do Nascimento, N. Chirani, Shape-memory polymers for dental applications,

Elsevier Ltd., 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-85709-698-2.00013-1.

[234] L.C. Hwa, S. Rajoo, A.M. Noor, N. Ahmad, M.B. Uday, Recent advances in 3D printing

of porous ceramics: A review, Curr. Opin. Solid State Mater. Sci. 21 (2017) 323–347.

[235] S.C. Ligon, R. Liska, J. Stampfl, M. Gurr, R. Mulhaupt, Polymers for 3D printing and

customized additive manufacturing, Chem. Rev. 117 (2017) 10212–10290.

[236] L. Lin, Y. Fang, Y. Liao, G. Chen, C. Gao, P. Zhu, 3D printing and digital processing

techniques in dentistry: A review of literature, Adv. Eng. Mater. 21 (2019) 1801013.

[237] J.K. Fink, Materials, Chemicals and Methods for Dental Applications, John Wiley &

Sons, 2018.