Methods: One hundred and eighty standardized disc samples were prepared, of which ninety samples each were used for surface roughness and microhardness test, respectively. They were divided equally into: Group 1 (Filtek-Z350-XT), Group 2 (Zmack-Comp), and Group 3 (Zr-Hybrid). For surface roughness test, all samples were polished with aluminium oxide discs and further subdivided into aged and unaged subgroups, in which composite samples in aged subgroups were subjected to 2500 thermal cycles. Next, all the samples were subjected to surface roughness test using a contact stylus profilometer. As for microhardness test, all the aged and unaged samples were tested using a Vickers hardness machine with a load of 300 kgf for 10 s and viewed under a digital microscope to obtain microhardness value. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA followed by post hoc Tukey's honestly significant difference and paired sample t-test with significance level set at P = 0.05.

Results: In both the aged and unaged groups, Zr-Hybrid showed statistically significantly lower surface roughness (P < 0.05) than Filtek-Z350-XT and Zmack-Comp, but no statistically significant difference was noted between Filtek-Z350-XT and Zmack-Comp (P > 0.05). A similar pattern was noted in microhardness test, whereby Zr-Hybrid showed the highest value (P < 0.05) followed by Filtek-Z350-XT and lastly Zmack-Comp. Besides, significant differences in surface roughness and microhardness were noted between the aged and unaged groups.

METHODS: A total of 40 Tetric EvoCeram™ resin composite specimens against either a Lava™ Plus zirconia antagonist (n=20) or IPS e.max Press lithium disilicate antagonist (n=20) were prepared for the study. The surface roughness profiles of each resin composite before and after an in-vitro simulated chewing test were analysed using a 3D profilometer and Talymap software. After the simulated chewing, the surface profiles of representative Tetric EvoCeram specimens from each group were analysed using scanning electron microscopy. Independent t-test and paired t-test were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS: For both lithium disilicate and zirconia groups, all surface roughness parameters (Ra, Rt, Sa, Sq,) of Tetric EvoCeram were significantly higher post-chewing compared to pre-chewing (p<0.05); the post-chewing surface roughness parameters of Tetric EvoCeram for the lithium disilicate group were significantly higher (p<0.05) than in the zirconia group.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to incorporate microparticles into a commercially available 3D printed denture base resin and compare its mechanical and biological properties with the conventional polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) denture base material.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Microparticles were collected from milled zirconia blanks and were blended with a 3D printing denture base resin (NextDent Denture 3D+). The optimal zirconia microparticle content (2%) for blending and printed was determined by using a liquid-crystal display (LCD) 3D printer. The printed specimens were then postrinsed and postpolymerized based on the manufacturer's instructions. Mechanical and biological characterization were carried out in terms of flexural strength, fracture toughness, and fungal adhesion. One-way ANOVA was carried out to analyze the results statistically.