Comparative evaluation of surface roughness (RA) of conventional heat-cured, high-impact heat-cured, and 3D-printed denture base resins: An in-vitro profilometer study
, , ,
Abstract
Background of Study: The surface roughness of denture base resins is an important criterion which is influencing the plaque accumulation, the microbial adhesion, staining, comfort to use, and the long-term success of prostheses. Conventional heat-cured polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) has been widely used for denture fabrication, while high-impact heat-cured and 3D-printed denture base resins have emerged with advancements in material science and digital dentistry. However, concerns remain regarding the surface characteristics of 3D-printed denture base resins.
The present study aims to evaluate and compare the surface roughness (Ra) of conventional heat-cured, high-impact heat-cured, and 3D-printed denture base resins using a contact profilometer.
Materials and Methods: An in-vitro experimental study was conducted in the Department of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge. Twenty-seven disc-shaped specimens (15 mm × 3 mm) fabricated according to ISO 1567 which were divided into three groups (n = 9): conventional heat-cured Acrylic, the high-impact heat-cured acrylic, and 3D-printed denture base resin. All specimens underwent finishing and polishing procedure and were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours. Surface roughness was measured using a calibrated contact profilometer, and mean Ra values were calculated. Data was analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post-hoc tests (p < 0.05).
Results: A statistically significant difference in surface roughness was observed among the three groups, with 3D-printed denture base resin showing higher Ra values compared to conventional and high-impact heat-cured resins.
Conclusion: Within the limitations of this in-vitro study, 3D-printed denture base resins exhibited higher surface roughness than conventionally processed materials, highlighting the importance of appropriate finishing and polishing protocols.
Dates & metrics
- Received
- 1 Apr 2026
- Accepted
- 12 Jun 2026
- Published
- 16 Jul 2026
Research metrics from Altmetric, Dimensions and PlumX load once cookies are accepted - they are provided by those companies and would otherwise be told you are reading this.
References
Al-Dulaijan YA, Alsulaimi L, Alotaibi R, Alboainain A, Alalawi H, Alshehri S, et al. Comparative Evaluation of Surface Roughness and Hardness of 3D Printed Resins. Materials (Basel). 2022;15(19):6822. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15196822
Falahchai M, Ghavami-Lahiji M, Rasaie V, Amin M, Neshandar Asli H. Comparison of mechanical properties, surface roughness, and color stability of 3D-printed and conventional heat-polymerizing denture base materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;130(2):266.e1-266.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.06.006
Zissis AJ, Polyzois GL, Yannikakis SA, Harrison A. Roughness of denture materials: a comparative study. Int J Prosthodont. 2000;13(2):136–40.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 1567: denture base polymers. 2nd ed. Geneva: The Organization; 1998.
John J, Gangadhar SA, Shah I. Flexural strength of heatpolymerized polymethyl methacrylate denture resin reinforced with glass, aramid, or nylon fibers. J Prosthet Dent. 2001;86(4):424–27. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.118564
Al-Dulaijan YA, Alsulaimi L, Alotaibi R, Alboainain A, Alalawi H, Alshehri S, et al. Comparative Evaluation of Surface Roughness and Hardness of 3D Printed Resins. Materials (Basel). 2022;15(19):6822. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15196822
Ryu HS, Lee EH, Kwon HB, Lim YJ, Lee SW, Kim MJ. The effects of fabrication methods and build orientation on Candida albicans adhesion on 3D-printed and conventional denture resin: an in vitro comparative study. BMC Oral Health. 2025;25(1):1788. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-07266-7
Singh B, Jain S, Bhasin N, Kaur J, Borse P, Longkumer P. Comparative Evaluation of Surface Roughness, Wettability, and Hardness of Conventional, Heat-Polymerized, Computer-Aided Designed and Milled, and ThreeDimensionally Printed Polymethyl Methacrylate Denture Base Resins: An In Vitro Study. Cureus. 2025;17(5):e85008. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.85008
Alharbi N, Osman R, Wismeijer D. Effects of build direction on the mechanical properties of 3D-printed complete coverage interim dental restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(6):760–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.002
Stawarczyk B, Ender A, Trottmann A, O zcan M, Fischer J, Ha mmerle CHF. Load-bearing capacity of CAD/CAM milled polymeric three-unit fixed dental prostheses: effect of aging regimens. Clin Oral Investig. 2012;16(6):1669–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0670-4
Sfondrini MF, Gariboldi F, Cerri M, Todaro C, Pascadopoli M, Casiraghi G, et al. Influence of Printing Orientation on the Flexural Strength of Different Light-Cured Resins Manufactured with Two 3D Printers: In Vitro Study. Materials (Basel). 2025;18(13):3029. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18133029
Bollen CML, Lambrechts P, Quirynen M. Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to threshold for bacterial plaque retention. Dent Mater. 1997;13(4):258–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0109-5641(97)80038-3
Radford DR, Sweet SP, Challacombe SJ, Walter JD. Adherence of Candida albicans to denture-base materials with different surface finishes. J Dent. 1998;26(7):577–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0300-5712(97)00034-1
Aati S, Chauhan A, Shrestha B, Rajan S, Aati H, Fawzy A. Development of 3D printed dental resin nanocomposite with graphene nanoplatelets enhanced mechanical properties and induced drug-free antimicrobial activity. Dental Materials. 2022;38(12):1921–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2022.10.001
Al-Dulaijan YA, Alsulaimi L, Alotaibi R, Alboainain A, Alalawi H, Alshehri S, et al. Comparative Evaluation of Surface Roughness and Hardness of 3D Printed Resins. Materials (Basel). 2022;15(19):6822. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15196822
How to cite this article
Vashisht A, Kumar V, Arya G, Seth J. Comparative evaluation of surface roughness (RA) of conventional heat-cured, high-impact heat-cured, and 3D-printed denture base resins: An in-vitro profilometer study. J. Sci. Adv. Dent. 2026;1(2):35-40. doi:10.65929/JSAD.2026.1.2.002
Vashisht, A., Kumar, V., Arya, G., & Seth, J. (2026). Comparative evaluation of surface roughness (RA) of conventional heat-cured, high-impact heat-cured, and 3D-printed denture base resins: An in-vitro profilometer study. Journal of Scientific Advances in Dentistry, 1(2), 35-40. https://doi.org/10.65929/JSAD.2026.1.2.002
Aditi Vashisht, Varun Kumar, Geeta Arya, and Jyotsna Seth. "Comparative evaluation of surface roughness (RA) of conventional heat-cured, high-impact heat-cured, and 3D-printed denture base resins: An in-vitro profilometer study." Journal of Scientific Advances in Dentistry, vol. 1, no. 2, 2026, pp. 35-40. https://doi.org/10.65929/JSAD.2026.1.2.002
Aditi Vashisht, Varun Kumar, Geeta Arya, and Jyotsna Seth. "Comparative evaluation of surface roughness (RA) of conventional heat-cured, high-impact heat-cured, and 3D-printed denture base resins: An in-vitro profilometer study." Journal of Scientific Advances in Dentistry 1, no. 2 (2026): 35-40. https://doi.org/10.65929/JSAD.2026.1.2.002
Vashisht, A., Kumar, V., Arya, G., and Seth, J. (2026) 'Comparative evaluation of surface roughness (RA) of conventional heat-cured, high-impact heat-cured, and 3D-printed denture base resins: An in-vitro profilometer study', Journal of Scientific Advances in Dentistry, 1(2), pp. 35-40. https://doi.org/10.65929/JSAD.2026.1.2.002
© 2026 the authors. Published by REVO Publication. This article is distributed under CC BY 4.0, which permits use and redistribution provided the original work is properly cited.