Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Alternative Denture Base Materials for Allergic Patients

Written By

Lavinia Cosmina Ardelean, Laura-Cristina Rusu and Codruta Victoria Tigmeanu

Submitted: 28 September 2021 Reviewed: 09 December 2021 Published: 13 January 2022

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.101956

From the Edited Volume

Oral Health Care - An Important Issue of the Modern Society

Edited by Lavinia Cosmina Ardelean and Laura Cristina Rusu

Chapter metrics overview

921 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics


Traditionally, a denture base is manufactured using a heat-cured acrylic resin. This type of resin was first used in dental labs in 1936, being a great step forward. Because of the many disadvantages as increased porosity, high water sorption, polymerization shrinkage, allergenic potential and citotoxicity due to the residual monomer, awkward flasking and packaging, and difficult processing, alternatives were continuously searched. Monomer-free and high-impact acrylics were developed, and gold plating of the denture base was experienced, in order to provide an alternative to allergic patients. Once polymers developed, new types of resins, such as polyamides (nylon), acetal, epoxy resins, styrene, polycarbonate, vinyl, urethane, polyether ether ketone (PEEK), became available on the dental market, accompanied by modern technologies, such as injection. CAD/CAM milled and 3D printed denture bases represent the present state of the art in this domain. Our chapter aims to present these alternative materials, which are safe to use in cases of allergic patients and guarantee a healthy oral environment and a high degree of comfort.


  • denture base
  • acrylic resin
  • polymers
  • polyamides
  • acetal resin
  • PEEK
  • allergy
  • CAD/CAM milling
  • 3D printing

1. Introduction

Acrylic resins, which represented an important step forward in dentistry, have been used in manufacturing denture bases, artificial teeth, orthodontic appliances, maxillofacial prostheses, single-tooth or provisional restorations, as well as veneering materials, since the middle of the twentieth century [1].

Characterized by low density and thermal conductivity, good resistance to chemical solvents, acrylic resins became the most popular material for denture base fabrication because of the low fabrication cost, easy repair/reline, low weight, and aesthetical properties [2].

The most frequently used acrylic resins in dentistry are heat-cured. They seemed very promising at first, but, in time, it turned out that heat-cured acrylics had various shortcomings, such as poor resistance, dimensional stability issues, polymerization shrinkage, high degradation rate in wet environment, allergenic potential and citotoxicity due to the residual monomer, difficult processing, due to the awkward flasking and packing procedure (Figure 1) [3, 4, 5, 6].

Figure 1.

Flasking and packing of heat-cured acrylic dentures.

Acrylic resin becomes porous and permeable after prolonged use in the mouth wet environment, also being prone to discoloration [7].

The consequence may be denture base fracture, allergic reactions, and improper seating [8].

The fracture of the acrylic denture base is a very common clinical problem, partly due to its complex geometry, which favors stress concentration in certain areas [9]. Most of upper denture base fractures are caused by fatigue and impact, whereas in case of the lower denture base, impact and low fracture toughness are the main causes [10]. One of the primary problems of acrylics is the impact failure when the denture is accidentally dropped on a hard surface and fatigue failure when the unfit denture base deforms repeatedly through occlusal forces [11].

According to literature data, 68% of the acrylic dentures break within a few years after fabrication [12].

Acrylics are also well known for their allergenic potential, their citotoxicity being mainly due to the residual monomer [13, 14].

The adverse reactions of the oral mucosa, in case of conventional acrylic resins, may also be induced by porosity (Figure 2), poor hygiene, degradation due to water sorption [15, 16, 17].

Figure 2.

Porous acrylic denture base.

Inadequately cleaned dentures are subject to quick formation of a biofilm on their surface [18].

The anaerobic environment, characteristic under poorly cleaned denture bases, is associated with the proliferation of certain bacterial species, consequently leading to a pathogenic biofilm composition and inducing denture stomatitis by plaque accumulation (Figure 3) [19].

Figure 3.

Microbial flora found on the denture base surface: a. candida hyphae, b. cocci, c. mucinous conglomerate, d. trichomonas tenax (ATP Dragan coloration Ob. Im).

The often contaminated dentures of elderly patients may finally result in affecting the general health condition [20].

The high relative humidity of the oral environment, constant contact of the denture with saliva, cold and hot food and drinks, enzymes, bacteria, and the varying pH levels can severely affect the physical and mechanical properties of the denture [21]. Dental base materials, and especially acrylic resins, are prone to water sorption, as they tend to form hydrogen bonds with water molecules, which also leads to deteriorated physical and mechanical properties [22].

In order to overcome these disadvantages, various attempts have been made. One of the methods considered was gold plating, which has proved to increase the retention and overcome plaque accumulation. However, the method did not prevail, as the adhesion between the acrylic resin and the gold plated layer deteriorates and abrades.

Later on, reinforced acrylic resins, characterized by better resistance and low/none residual monomer, became available. Alternative polymer systems, such as polyamide, epoxy, styrene, acetal, polycarbonate, polyether ether ketone (PEEK), or vinyl resins, have been experimented, with promising results [23]. However, the desired denture base material has not been developed yet.


2. Alternative materials and techniques

There has been ongoing effort to enhance the strength and fatigue resistance of.

acrylic resins, by means of: reinforcement with the addition of filling materials, altering the chemistry of acrylic resins, and manufacturing alternative denture base materials [24, 25].

2.1 Reinforced acrylic resins

Previous studies have shown that favorable results in improving mechanical properties such as impact and transverse strength were overcome using various types of fillers such as glass, carbon, polylactic fiber, plyometric polyamide, ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene, aramid, rayon, ceramic particle (barium titanate, zirconium dioxide, silicon dioxide, hydroxyapatite, titanium dioxide, and calcium carbonate), and metal plates or wires [26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33].

There are numerous studies focusing on the effect of glass fibers on the mechanical qualities of acrylic resins, which reported improvement of tensile and flexural strength and esthetic results [34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39].

Different other materials have been used for reinforcement, such as viscose fibers, mica, juta, or vegetable fibers [40, 41, 42].

2.2 Alternative types of acrylic resins

Alternative manufacturing technologies for acrylic resins, which aimed at obtaining high-quality dentures, were constantly developed, using dedicated materials. These technologies including casting, injection, light curing, microwave polymerization, CAD/CAM milling, 3D printing have been more or less utilized [43].

Thermoplastic and CAD/CAM milled acrylates have a high impact rating resistance, long-term stability, being characterized by a dense and smooth surface. It’s highly biocompatible, due to the absence of residual monomer, and has very good long-term stability because of limited water retention [44].

Acrylic resins have been one of the most common commercial materials used for the manufacture of 3D printed denture bases. However, there were some technical challenges that hinder the application of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), such as large shrinkage, low degree of one-time curing, poor mechanical strength, low bacterial resistance, etc., limiting their clinical applications [45].

Nevertheless, great progress has been made in manufacturing alternative resin materials with outstanding properties.

2.3 Light-cured urethane-based resins

Urethane-based resins have no allergic potential, due to the absence of methyl, ethyl, propyl, and butyl groups. Manufactured by light curing, full and partial urethane dentures do not need flasking, packing, and heat curing, which are time-consuming. The system is extremely efficient and consists of three wax-like types of resins: baseplate resin, setup resin, contour resin. A full denture base needs no more than 30 minutes to process, starting with complete setting of the master model. The “wax-up” is practically made on the denture’s light-cured base, and after try-in, esthetic and phonetic approval, the final conditioning and light curing are carried out (Figures 47) [46].

Figure 4.

Baseplate resin before light curing.

Figure 5.

Attaching the teeth to the cured baseplate, by using the setup resin.

Figure 6.

Contour resin, overlaid on the baseplate, exposed setup resin and necks of the teeth, processed using the warm air gun to create a smooth surface.

Figure 7.

Final light curing.

2.4 Thermoplastic resins

Thermoplastic denture base materials include different types of hypoallergenic resins: polyamide (nylon), acetal, PEEK, epoxy, styrene, polycarbonate, vinyl, their most prominent advantages being higher elasticity, toxicological safety, and use of heat molding instead of chemical polymerization, which prevents polymerization shrinkage and related deformation [47, 48].

Thermoplastic resins are monomer-free and consequently nontoxic and non-allergenic, with high biocompatibility. They provide better resistance, esthetic appearance, and lower weight, being much more comfortable for the patient [8, 49, 50].

Their manufacture implies injection by special devices (Figure 8), after preheating the material (at a temperature of 200–250°C), in granular form, wrapped in special cartridges (Figure 9), which prevents dosage errors. The technology excludes any chemical reaction [51].

Figure 8.

Injection devices for thermoplatic resins.

Figure 9.

Thermoplastic grain-like resins, wrapped in cartridges.

Thermoplastic materials are suitable for the manufacturing of removable partial dentures, which totally or partially eliminate the metallic framework and clasps, resulting in the so-called “metal-free removable partial dentures.” If desired, any combination of the metallic framework or clasps with thermoplastic resin saddles and clasps is possible (Figure 10) [52, 53].

Figure 10.

Combination between thermoplastic resin saddle, metallic and acetal clasps.

Their indications include: removable partial dentures, preformed clasps, removable partial denture frameworks, temporary or provisional crowns and bridges, full dentures, orthodontic appliances, anti-snoring devices, mouthguards and splints [54].

2.4.1 Polyamides

Polyamides (nylon) are the condensation result of a diamine and a dibasic acid [55].

In 1950, they were introduced in dentistry, as an alternative to denture acrylic base, and are being characterized by different degrees of flexibility, depending on the type of polyamide. Their main indications include patients with tissue allergies, cases of retentive dental fields (which are normally problematic for the insertion and disinsertion of the removable partial denture), and repeated denture fracture, as they are unbreakable [56, 57]. A polyamide denture may be bounced off the floor without cracking its base.

The types of polyamides include superflexible polyamide (Figure 11), extremely elastic, and medium-low flexibility polyamide, a half-soft comfortable material.

Figure 11.

Metal-free superflexible polyamide removable partial dentures.

The clasps may be manufactured of the same material as the denture base. In the case of medium-low flexibility polyamide, ready-made clasps may be used. Metal clasps are also an option. (Figure 12).

Figure 12.

Superflexible polyamide removable partial denture with metal clasps (right after injection and ready-to-go).

2.4.2 Acetal resins

Acetal resins, also known as polyoxymethylene, are formed by the polymerization of formaldehyde. They have been used in dentistry since 1986, as alternative materials for denture base and clasps (Figure 13). Characterized by superior esthetics, acetal resins have been useful for low-weight removable partial dentures framework manufacturing in allergic patients [58]. They show high impact strength and elasticity [59]. Acetal resins are also indicated for Kemeny-type single unilateral partial dentures, provisional bridges, splints, and orthodontic appliances (Figure 13).

Figure 13.

Acetal framework and clasps; acetal splint.

2.5 Polyether ether ketone

PEEK is a ketone-based semi-crystalline thermoplastic with excellent mechanical and chemical resistance properties, used in dentistry since 2002, for crowns, implant superstructures, fixed partial dentures, and removable partial denture frameworks and clasps (Figure 14) [60, 61, 62, 63].

Figure 14.

Removable partial denture with PEEK framework and clasps.

PEEK is highly biocompatible, insoluble, lightweight, with superior resistance to wear and fracture and elasticity comparable to bone. It may be optimized by adding ceramic nanoparticles. The material may be injected (grains) at 400°C or milled (disks) using a CAD/CAM system (Figure 15) [44]. Recently, 3D printing using PEEK materials has been utilized. Direct-ink writing 3D printing uses soluble epoxy-functionalized PEEK (ePEEK) and fenchone, but the most widely used technique is fused deposition modeling (FDM), which requires increases in the nozzle and heating bed temperatures for PEEK materials [64, 65, 66].

Figure 15.

CAD/CAM milled PEEK framework.

2.6 CAD/CAM milled and 3D printed removable dentures

CAD/CAM systems, which enable manufacturing 3D objects, have been used in dentistry since 1980, at first for fixed prosthodontic restorations [67].

In the 1990s, the fabrication of removable prosthodontic restorations was attempted, using both 3D printing and milling technologies [68, 69].

They offer many advantages to both dentists and patients, such as reduced number of appointments and easily available spare dentures, as digital data are saved [70, 71, 72].

Compared with the traditional methods, the lab work can be completed more conveniently and cost-effectively. The high initial cost of the milling machine may be overcome by referring the data to a milling center, which will handle the actual manufacturing.

Currently, both CAD/CAM methods: substractive milling and additive printing, are being used for removable dentures manufacturing [73, 74]. By milling, the denture may be obtained as one item, teeth and denture base in a single body [75], or separate pieces, the artificial teeth requiring subsequent bonding to the denture base [76]. The latter is the most frequently used at present, as it allows using commercially available artificial teeth, with better esthetics and physical properties [77, 78].

In case of 3D printing, the light-curing resin used is quickly converted from a liquid to a solid under the action of ultraviolet or visible light. The emergence of nanomaterials provides a new way to improve the performance of 3D printed acrylics [79]. By incorporating TiO2, antibacterial effects have been obtained [80].

Cellulose nanocrystals were attempted to reinforce acrylic resins for 3D printing, with improved mechanical and antibacterial properties and no significant cytotoxic effect [81].

Light curing is a green technology and the main molding method involved in 3D printing of resin-based dental materials. When irradiated with light, the photosensitive resin undergoes stacking and curing [82].

It consists of three main technologies: stereolithogaphy, digital light processing (DLP), and fused deposition modeling (FDM). The distinctive feature of DLP technology is the diversity of materials, from thermoplastics to resins and ceramics, even zirconia paste. FDM, one of the cheapest and most popular 3D printing technologies in dentistry, enables using polylactic acid, polycarbonate, polyamide, acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene copolymers [83].

Besides full dentures and frameworks for removable partial dentures, 3D printing dental resins are also indicated for crowns and bridges, high-precision working models (Figures 16 and 17), splints, custom trays.

Figure 16.

3D printed high-precision models.

Figure 17.

3D printed working model for manufacturing a removable partial denture.


3. Conclusion

Long-term deterioration of acrylic dentures in the oral environment is still an unsolved problem. Their allergic potential, mainly due to the residual monomer, is well known. New choices of resins, with better properties compared with acrylics, have been constantly developed for dental applications. Alternative processing technologies, such as casting, injection, light curing, CAD/CAM milling, and 3D printing, have been aiming to improving their qualities.

Choosing the right material for manufacturing full or removable partial dentures is very important because it has direct effect on their characteristics and lifetime, especially in case of allergic patients.



The authors would like to thank Professor Cristina-Maria Bortun for her valuable contribution and support.


Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


  1. 1. Ardelean L, Rusu LC, Bratu DC, Bortun CM. Diacrylic composite resins as veneering materials. Revista Materiale Plastice. 2013;50:93-96
  2. 2. Patil SB, Naveen BH, Patil NP. Bonding acrylic teeth to acrylic resin denture bases: A review. Gerodontology. 2006;23:131-139
  3. 3. Kedjarune U, Charoenworaluk N, Koontongkaew S. Release of methyl methacrylate from heat-cured and autopolymerized resins: Cytotoxicity testing related to residual monomer. Australian Dental Journal. 1999;44:25-30
  4. 4. Machado C, Sanchez E, Azer SS, et al. Comparative study of the transverse strength of three denture base materials. Journal of Dentistry. 2007;35:930-933
  5. 5. Koroglu A, Ozdemir T, Pamir AD, Usanmaz A. Residual acrylic monomer content of denture base resins with different fiber systems. Journal of Applied Polymer Science. 2012;125:471-476
  6. 6. Cheng YY, Cheung WL, Chow TW. Strain analysis of maxillary complete denture with three-dimensional finite element method. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2010;103:309-318
  7. 7. Singh S, Palaskar JN, Mittal S. Comparative evaluation of surface porosities in conventional heat polymerized acrylic resin cured by water bath and microwave energy with microwavable acrylic resin cured by microwave energy. Contemporary Clinical Dentistry. 2013;4:147-151
  8. 8. Nakhaei M, Dashti H, Barazandeh R, et al. Shear bond strength of acrylic denture teeth to PMMA and polyamide denture base material. JDMT. 2018;7:19-23
  9. 9. Alhareb AO, Akil HBM, Ahmad ZAB. Poly(methyl methacrylate) denture base composites enhancement by various combinations of nitrile butadiene rubber/treated ceramic fillers. Journal of Thermoplastic Composite Materials. 2017;30:1069-1090. DOI: 10.1177/0892705715616856
  10. 10. Darbar UR, Huggett R, Harrison A. Denture fracture – a survey. British Dental Journal. 1994;176:342-345
  11. 11. Kim SH, Watts DC. The effect of reinforcement with woven e-glass fibers on the impact strength of complete dentures fabricated with high-impact acrylic resin. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2004;91:274-280
  12. 12. Vojdani M, Bagheri R, Khaledi AAR. Effect of aluminium oxide addition on the flexural strength, surface hardness, and roughness of heat-polymerized acrylic resin. Journal of Dental Sciences. 2012;7:238-244
  13. 13. de Araújo AM, Alves GR, Avanço GT, Parizi JLS, Nai GA. Assessment of methyl methacrylate genotoxicity by the micronucleus test. Brazilian Oral Research. 2013;27:31-36
  14. 14. Rusu LC, Urechescu H, Ardelean L, Levai MC, Pricop M. Comparative study for oral reaction produced by polymethylmethacrylate. Materiale Plastice. 2015;52:413-415
  15. 15. Olms C, Yahiaoui-Doktor M, Remmerbach TW, Stingu CS. Bacterial colonisation and tissue compatibility of denture base resins. Dental Journal. 2018;6:20. DOI: 10.3390/dj6020020
  16. 16. Gungor H, Gundogdu M, Duymus ZY. Investigation of the effect of different polishing techniques on the surface roughness of denture base and repair materials. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2014;112:1271-1277
  17. 17. Takahashi Y, Yoshida K, Shimizu H. Fracture resistance of maxillary complete dentures subjected to long term water immersion. Gerodontology. 2012;29:e1086-e1091
  18. 18. Sachdeo A, Haffajee AD, Socransky SS. Biofilms in the edentulous oral cavity. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2008;17:348-356
  19. 19. Gendreau L, Loewy Z. Epidemiology and etiology of denture stomatitis. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2011;20:251-260
  20. 20. O'Donnell LE, Smith K, Williams C, et al. Dentures are a reservoir for respiratory pathogens. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2016;25:99-104. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12342
  21. 21. Dogan OM, Bolayır G, Keskin S, Doğan A, Bek B, Boztuğ A. The effect of esthetic fibers on impact resistance of a conventional heat-cured denture base resin. Dental Materials Journal. 2007;26:232-239
  22. 22. Soygun K, Bolayir G, Boztug A. Mechanical and thermal properties of polyamide versus reinforced PMMA denturebase materials. The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics. 2013;5:153-160
  23. 23. Phoenix RD, Mansueto MA, Ackerman NA, Jones RE. Evaluation of mechanical and thermal properties of commonly used denture base resins. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2004;13:17-27
  24. 24. Chen SY, Liang WM, Yen PS. Reinforcement of acrylic denture base resin by incorporation of various fibers. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research. 2001;58:203-208
  25. 25. Singh JP, Dhiman RK, Bedi RP, Girish SH. Flexible denture base material: A viable alternative to conventional acrylic denture base material. Contemporary Clinical Dentistry. 2011;2:313-317
  26. 26. Asar NV, Albayrak H, Korkmaz T, et al. Influence of various metal oxides on mechanical and physical properties of heat-cured poly methyl methacrylate denture base resins. The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics. 2013;5:241-247
  27. 27. Ayad NM, Badawi MF, Fatah AA. Effect of reinforcement of high impact acrylic resin with zirconia on some physical and mechanical properties. Revista de Clínica e Pesquisa Odontológica. 2008;4:145-151
  28. 28. Elshereksi NW, Mohamed SH, Arifin A, et al. Effect of filler incorporation on the fracture toughness properties of denture base poly(methyl methacrylate). Journal of Physical Science. 2009;20:1-12
  29. 29. Sanchez JLA, Gomez ML, Bon RR, et al. Mechanical behavior of hybrid SiO2-PMMA coating measured by nanoindentation. Advances Technology Materials and Material Process Journal. 2006;8:81-86
  30. 30. Alla RK, Sajjan S, Alluri VR, et al. Influence of fiber reinforcement on the properties of denture base resins. Journal of Biomaterials and Nanobiotechnology. 2013;4:91-97
  31. 31. Dogan OM, Bolayir G, Keshin S, Dogan A, Bek B. The evaluation of some flexural properties of a denture base resin reinforced with various aesthetic fibers. Journal of Materials Science. Materials in Medicine. 2008;19:2343-2349
  32. 32. Calamote C, Coelho C, Silva AS, Esteves JL, Moreira L, Correia Pinto A, et al. Comparison of the masticatory force (with 3D Models) of complete denture base acrylic resins with reline and reinforcing materials. Materials. 2021;14:3308. DOI: 10.3390/ma14123308
  33. 33. Cheng YY, Li JY, Cheung WL, Chow TW. 3D FEA of high-performance polyethylene fiber reinforced maxillary dentures. Dental Materials. 2010;26:e211-e219
  34. 34. Nakamura M, Takahashi H, Hayakawa I. Reinforcement of denture base resin with short-rod glass fiber. Dental Materials Journal. 2007;26:733-738
  35. 35. Kanie T, Fujii K, Arikawa H, Inoue K. Flexural properties and impact strength of denture base polymer reinforced with woven glass fibers. Dental Materials. 2000;16:150-158
  36. 36. Jagger D, Harrison A, Vowles R, Jagger R. The effect of the addition of surface treated chopped and continuous poly (methyl methacrylate) fibres on some properties of acrylic resins. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 2001;28:865-872
  37. 37. Tsue F, Takahashi Y, Shimizu H. Reinforcing effect of glass-fiber-reinforced composite on flexural strength at the proportional limit of denture base resin. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. 2007;65:141-148
  38. 38. Yu S-H, Cho H-W, Oh S, Bae J-M. Effects of glass fiber mesh with different fiber content and structures on the compressive properties of complete dentures. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2015;113:636-644
  39. 39. Kanie T, Arikawa H, Fujii K, Ban S. Impact strength of acrylic denture base resin reinforced with woven glass fiber. Dental Materials Journal. 2003;22:30-38
  40. 40. Mansour MM, Wagner WC, Chu TG. Effect of MICA reinforcement on the flexural strength and microhardness of polymethyl methacrylate denture resin. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2013;22:179-183
  41. 41. Xu J, Li Y, Yu T, Cong L. Reinforcement of denture base resin with short vegetable fiber. Dental Materials. 2013;29:1273-1279
  42. 42. Yu S-H, Lee Y, Oh S, Cho H-W, Oda Y, Bae J-M. Reinforcing effects of different fibers on denture base resin based on the fiber type, concentration, and combination. Dental Materials Journal. 2012;31:1039-1046
  43. 43. El Bahra S, Ludwig K, Samran A, Freitag-Wolf S, Kern M. Linear and volumetric dimensional changes of injection-molded PMMA denture base resins. Dental Materials. 2013;29:1091-1097. DOI: 10.1016/
  44. 44. Ardelean L, Bortun CM, Podariu AC, Rusu LC. Acrylates and their alternatives in dental applications. In: Reddy BSR, editor. Acrylic Polymers in Healthcare. London: IntechOpen; 2017. pp. 3-24. DOI: 10.5772/66610
  45. 45. Gautam R, Singh RD, Sharma VP, Siddartha R, Chand P, Kumar R. Biocompatibility of polymethylmethacrylate resins used in dentistry. Journal of Biomedial Materials Research Part B Applied Biomaterials. 2012;100B:1444-1450
  46. 46. Kurtzman GM, Melton AB. Full arch removable prosthetics with Eclipse. Spectrum Denturism. 2008;2:1-8
  47. 47. Rickman LJ, Padipatvuthikul P, Satterthwaite JD. Contemporary denture base resins: Part 1. Dental Update. 2012;39:25-30
  48. 48. Singh K, Aeran H, Kumar N, Gupta N. Flexible thermoplastic denture base materials for aesthetical removable partial denture framework. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2013;7:2372-2373
  49. 49. Fueki K, Ohkubo C, Yatabe M, Arakawa I, Arita M, et al. Clinical application of removable partial dentures using thermoplastic resin-part I: Definition and indication of non-metal clasp dentures. Journal of Prosthodontic Research. 2014;58(1):3-10
  50. 50. Fueki K, Ohkubo C, Yatabe M, Arakawa I, Arita M, Ino S, et al. Clinical application of removable partial dentures using thermoplastic resin. Part II: Material properties and clinical features of non-metal clasp dentures. Journal of Prosthodontic Research. 2014;58(2):71-84
  51. 51. Ardelean L, Bortun C, Podariu A, Rusu L. Manufacture of different types of thermoplastic. In: El-Sonbati AZ, editor. Thermoplastic - Composite Materials. Rijeka: InTech; 2012. pp. 25-48
  52. 52. Ardelean L, Bortun CM, Podariu AC, Rusu LC. Thermoplastic resins used in dentistry. In: Das CK, editor. Thermoplastic Elastomers. Synthesis and Applications. Rijeka: InTech; 2015. pp. 145-167. DOI: 10.5772/59647
  53. 53. Ardelean LC, Bortun CM, Podariu AC, Rusu LC. Polymeric alternatives in manufacturing removable partial dentures. Materiale Plastice. 2017;54:754-756
  54. 54. Ardelean L, Bortun CM, Podariu AC, Rusu LC. Some alternatives for classic thermopolymerisable acrylic dentures. Materiale Plastice. 2012;49:30-33
  55. 55. Uçar Y, Akova T, Aysan I. Mechanical properties of polyamide versus different PMMA denture base materials. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2012;21:173-176
  56. 56. Yunus N, Rashid AA, Azmi LL, Abu-Hassan MI. Some flexural properties of a nylon denture base polymer. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 2005;32:65-71
  57. 57. Soygun K, Bolayir G, Boztug A. Mechanical and thermal properties of polyamide versus reinforced PMMA denture base materials. The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics. 2013;5:153-160
  58. 58. Meenakshi A, Gupta R, Bharti V, Sriramaprabu G, Prabhakar R. An evaluation of retentive ability and deformation of acetal resin and cobalt-chromium clasps. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2016;10:ZC37-ZC41. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/15476.7078
  59. 59. Arda T, Arikan A. An in vitro comparison of retentive force and deformation of acetal resin and cobalt-chromium clasps. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2005;94:267-274. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.06.009
  60. 60. Ichikawa T, Kurahashi K, Liu L, Matsuda T, Ishida Y. Use of a polyetheretherketone clasp retainer for removable partial dentures: A case Report. Dental Journal. 2019;7:4. DOI: 10.3390/dj7010004
  61. 61. Zoidis P, Papathanasiou I, Polyzois G. The use of a modified Poly-Ether-Ether-Ketone (PEEK) as an alternative framework material for removable dental prostheses. A clinical report. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2016;140:580-584
  62. 62. Najeeb S, Zafar MS, Hurshid Z, Siddiqui F. Applications of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) in oral implantology and prosthodontics. Journal of Prosthodontic Research. 2016;60:12-19
  63. 63. Rahmitasari F, Ishida Y, Kurahashi K, Matsuda T, Watanabe M, Ichikawa T. PEEK with reinforced materials and modifications for dental implant applications. Dental Journal. 2017;15:35. DOI: 10.3390/dj5040035
  64. 64. Vaezi M, Yang S. Extrusion-based additive manufacturing of PEEK for biomedical applications. Virtual and Physical Prototyping. 2015;310:123-135
  65. 65. Zalaznik M, Kalin M, Novak S. Influence of the processing temperature on the tribological and mechanical properties of poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK) polymer. Tribology International. 2016;94:92-97
  66. 66. Lee CU, Vandenbrande J, Goetz A, Ganter M, Storti D, Boydston A. Room temperature extrusion 3D printing of poly-ether ether ketone using a stimuli-responsive binder. Bulletin Am. 2019;28:430-438
  67. 67. Han SY, Moon YH, Lee J. Shear bond strength between CAD/CAM denture base resin and denture artificial teeth when bonded with resin cement. The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics. 2020;12:251-258. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2020.12.5.251
  68. 68. Maeda Y, Minoura M, Tsutsumi S, Okada M, Nokubi T. A CAD/CAM system for removable denture. Part I: Fabrication of complete dentures. The International Journal of Prosthodontics. 1994;7:17-21
  69. 69. Kawahata N, Ono H, Nishi Y, Hamano T, Nagaoka E. Trial of duplication procedure for complete dentures by CAD/CAM. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 1997;24:540-548. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.1997.00522.x
  70. 70. Pereyra NM, Marano J, Subramanian G, Quek S, Leff D. Comparison of patient satisfaction in the fabrication of conventional dentures vs. DENTCA (CAD/CAM) dentures: A case report. Journal of the New Jersey Dental Association. 2015;86:26-33
  71. 71. Park JH, Cho IH, Shin SY, Choi YS. The treatment of an edentulous patient with Denta™ CAD/CAM denture. The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics. 2015;53:19-25. DOI: 368 10.4047/jkap.2015.53.1.19. 369
  72. 72. Kim MJ, Kim KH, Yeo DH. Fabrication of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing complete denture and conventional complete denture: Case report. Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science. 2016;32:141-148. DOI: 10.14368/jdras.2016.32.2.141
  73. 73. Kattadiyil MT, Goodacre CJ, Baba NZ. CAD/CAM complete dentures: A review of two commercial fabrication systems. Journal of the California Dental Association. 2013;41:407-416
  74. 74. Kattadiyil MT, Al Helal A, Goodacre BJ. Clinical complications and quality assessments with computer-engineered complete dentures: A systematic review. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2017;117:721-728
  75. 75. Bidra AS, Farrell K, Burnham D, Dhingra A, Taylor TD, Kuo CL. Prospective cohort pilot study of 2-visit CAD/CAM monolithic complete dentures and implant-retained overdentures: Clinical and patient-centered outcomes. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2015;115:578-586.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.10.023
  76. 76. Goodacre BJ, Goodacre CJ, Baba NZ, Kattadiyil MT. Comparison of denture base adaptation between CAD-CAM and conventional fabrication techniques. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2016;116:249-256. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.02.017
  77. 77. Kim TH, Varjao F. 3D printed complete dentures. In: Duarte S. Jr, editor. Quintessence of Dental Technology. Quintessence Publishing; 2016. p. 141-149
  78. 78. Chung YJ, Park JM, Kim TH, Ahn JS, Cha HS, Lee JH. 3D printing of resin material for denture artificial teeth: Chipping and indirect tensile fracture resistance. Materials. 2018;11:1798. DOI: 10.3390/ma11101798
  79. 79. Anne G, Oliganti SHB, Atla J, Budati S, Manne P, Chiramana S. The effect of aluminum oxide addition on the flexural strength of heat activated acrylic resin: An in vitro study. Journal of Dr Ntr University of Health Sciences. 2015;4:21-23. DOI: 10.4103/2277-8632.153307
  80. 80. Totu EE, Nechifor AC, Nechifor G, Aboul-Enein HY, Cristache CM. Poly(methyl methacrylate) with TiO nanoparticles inclusion for stereolitographic complete denture manufacturing - the fututre in dental care for elderly edentulous patients? Journal of Dentistry. 2017;59:68-77
  81. 81. Chen S, Yang J, Jia YG, Lu B, Ren L. A study of 3D-printable reinforced composite resin: PMMA modified with silver nanoparticles loaded cellulose nanocrystal. Materials. 2018;11:2444. DOI: 10.3390/ma11122444
  82. 82. Rehbein T, Johlitz M, Lion A, Sekmen K, Constantinescu A. Temperature-and degree of cure-dependent viscoelastic properties of photopolymer resins used in digital light processing. Progress in Additive Manufacturing. 2021;6:743-756. DOI: 10.1007/ s40964-021-00194-2
  83. 83. Tian Y, Chen C, Xu X, Wang J, Hou X, Li K, et al. A review of 3D printing in dentistry: Technologies, affecting factors, and applications. Scanning. 2021;202:9950131. DOI: 10.1155/2021/9950131

Written By

Lavinia Cosmina Ardelean, Laura-Cristina Rusu and Codruta Victoria Tigmeanu

Submitted: 28 September 2021 Reviewed: 09 December 2021 Published: 13 January 2022