Comparison of Implant-Supported Permanent Crowns Produced wıth Different 3D Printed Resins in Terms of Productıon Accuracy, Marginal Fit and Internal Fit: A Comparative in Vitro Study

PURPOSE: This study aimed to comparatively evaluate the manufacturing accuracy, marginal and internal fit of implant-supported permanent crowns fabricated using different brands of permanent hybrid ceramic resins via 3D printing. Additionally, these outcomes were compared with crowns produced from Vita-Enamic using the subtractive CAD/CAM technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six groups were formed, including five different 3D printing resins and Vita-Enamic. Crown accuracy was evaluated following ISO Standard 12836:2015. For accuracy measurements, root mean square values were calculated and recorded using Geomagic-DesignX software, based on methodologies described in the literature. Marginal and internal fit were assessed by measuring points on sectioned specimens under an optical microscope. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22.0. RESULTS: The Saremco Crowntec showed (p<0,05) the highest internal and marginal fit (55,10 ± 9,433; 89,30 ± 20,966), while the Bego VarseoSmile TriniQ demonstrated the lowest marginal fit (141,70 ± 39,668) and external accuracy (92,90 ± 11,239). No significant difference was found between additive and subtractive groups in marginal fit and accuracy; the best internal fit (63,62 ± 13,352) was observed in additive groups, whereas Vita-Enamic showed (p<0,05) external accuracy (27,70 ± 6,961). Among production technologies, digital light processing exhibited (p<0,05) the lowest external accuracy (64,73 ± 25,209), with no significant difference between subtractive manufacturing and stereolithography (p>0,05). CONCLUSIONS: Case-specific material choice is essential. Each material has distinct advantages and limitations. Additive resins may be preferred where retention and internal fit are critical, while subtractive materials are suitable when surface accuracy is prioritized.