BackgroundThe development of three-dimensional (3D) printing technology has provided unprecedented opportunities for the fabrication of restorations in many fields, including dentistry1. Compared to traditional methods, the use of 3D printing in the fabrication of provisional restorations offers many advantages such as higher precision, efficiency and customization2. With appropriate material selection, 3D printed provisional crowns can demonstrate superior aesthetics, durability and biocompatibility2. However, the success of these restorations depends on precise optimization of 3D printer parameters and process variables3. Recent advancements in additive manufacturing have greatly broadened the scope of 3D printing within dentistry, extending its utility well beyond temporary restorations. Today, 3D printing technologies are increasingly being applied to the fabrication of permanent fixed prostheses such as crowns, bridges, and veneers. This expansion has been driven by significant improvements in both the physical properties of printable materials and the precision of printing processes. Contemporary evidence demonstrates that certain 3D-printed restorative materials can achieve satisfactory levels of mechanical performance, marginal adaptation, and esthetic outcomes, at times approaching those of conventionally manufactured alternatives. Nonetheless, the translation of 3D-printed materials into routine permanent clinical use remains an evolving field. The literature highlights persisting limitations, particularly the need for standardized laboratory protocols and robust, long-term clinical data evaluating durability, biocompatibility, and esthetic stability. Despite these challenges, additive manufacturing represents a dynamic and promising direction for restorative dentistry, offering potential advantages in terms of customization, workflow efficiency, and cost-effectiveness for a wide range of clinical indications4. In parallel, resin-based materials have played a pivotal role in modern dentistry, leading to significant improvements in aesthetic outcomes and clinical predictability, as evidenced by recent clinical studies5.The Munsell colour system defines colours based on three properties: hue, chroma, and value. This system helps in visually identifying tooth shade. The Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage (CIE) Lab* system, which is an international standardization organization for colour, uses three coordinates—L*, a*, and b*—to quantify acceptable colour changes. L* denotes lightness, ranging from 0 for perfect black to 100 for perfect white. Meanwhile, a* and b* represent chromaticity along the red-green and yellow-blue axes, respectively6.While the CIELAB system is commonly used, the CIEDE2000 (∆E00) system is preferred due to its increased sensitivity to noticeable changes2. This modification of CIELAB offers superior performance in predicting experimental datasets, particularly for applications such as pass or fail decisions, color constancy, metamerism, and color rendering3. Visual thresholds are important in quality control as they guide the evaluation and selection of dental materials. However, visual color determination can be highly variable. Therefore, it is recommended to supplement visual assessments with instrumental determination using devices such as colorimeters, spectrophotometers, and digital photo analysis tools7. Spectrophotometers are considered the most precise instruments for colour analysis, providing valuable insights into colour distribution across tooth groups and thirds6.Translucency, the degree to which a material allows light to pass through it, is critical to the esthetic outcome of dental restorations. Achieving the right level of translucency is essential to mimic natural teeth and achieve a realistic appearance. Factors such as material thickness and chemical composition play a crucial role in determining translucency. Thinner materials generally allow more light to pass through, creating a natural appearance, whereas thicker materials tend to scatter and absorb more light, reducing translucency. In 3D printing, this can be achieved by selecting appropriate materials and adjusting software settings. Post-curing, a key step in the 3D printing process, ensures that the material reaches its full mechanical and optical potential. However, the effect of post-curing duration on the optical properties, particularly translucency, remains underexplored. In addition, color stability is critical to the longevity of temporary restorations. These materials must resist discoloration from temperature changes and oral colorants, especially in implant-supported applications. While the mechanical properties of 3D composite resins have been well studied, research into their optical properties remains limited1,8,9,10.Hardness is defined as the resistance of a material to indentation or penetration. It has been used to predict the wear resistance of a material and its ability to abrade or be abraded by opposing tooth structures. The surface hardness of the restoration protects the restoration by resisting the pressures created by rigid materials. Higher hardness values may indicate better wear resistance but could also affect the opposing dentition if not carefully balanced. The destruction occurring in the restoration creates cracks over time, causing marginal deterioration and loss of the restoration. Tests commonly used to measure the hardness value of restorative materials are Brinell, Knoop, Vickers and Rockwell. Each test has different advantages and disadvantages. The Vickers test is suitable for determining the hardness of brittle materials. Therefore, it is used to measure the hardness of porcelain and tooth surfaces11.Recent advancements in 3D printing technology have focused primarily on improving the mechanical properties of dental materials through post-curing processes7,12. While studies like Lassila et al.13 have shown that post-curing conditions significantly affect mechanical properties, their impact on optical characteristics such as translucency and color stability has been less explored. Moreover, the interplay between material thickness, post-curing time, and their combined influence on optical properties has not been comprehensively studied in the existing literature. This study aims to address these gaps by evaluating how varying thicknesses and post-curing times influence the translucency parameter (TP), color changes (ΔE), and microhardness of 3D-printed provisional restorations.The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of manufacturing NextDent provisional resin in different thicknesses and subjecting it to different post curing times on its translucency parameter and colour discrepancy. The null hypothesis is that there is no statistically significant difference in these parameters between the different thicknesses and post curing times.MethodsThe sample size in this study was determined based on experimental feasibility and by reference to published standards in dental materials research. Previous in vitro studies have commonly used 8–10 specimens per group for optical and mechanical testing, balancing methodological rigor with ethical and practical constraints14,15. Accordingly, a total of 54 samples (nine per group across six groups) were included in the present study to ensure both comparability with the existing literature and sufficient data for statistical evaluation. A priori power analysis using G*Power (version 3.1.9.4; University of Düsseldorf, Germany) indicated that a sample size of nine specimens per group (total N = 54) would provide adequate statistical power (80%) to detect moderate effect sizes (Cohen’s f = 0.25) in one-way ANOVA comparisons among groups. The study involved the preparation of NextDent Try In resin (NextDent, 3D Systems) in the Tl1 shade. Disk specimens measuring 10 mm in diameter and with thicknesses of 1 mm, 2 mm, and 3 mm were fabricated, totaling 54 samples. Two distinct post-curing processes were utilized using the Lc-3D print box device (NextDent, 3D Systems), one lasting for 20 min and the other for 25 min. Each group consisted of 9 specimens, resulting in six groups: 9 specimens for 1–20 min polymerized group, 9 specimens for the 2–20 min polymerized group, 9 specimens for the 3–20 min polymerized group and 9 specimens each for the 1 mm, 2 mm and 3 mm groups post cured for 25 min.A disk specimen of 10 × 2 mm in size was prepared from composite resin using silicone mold. The prepared disk sample was scanned using digital intraoral scanner (TRIOS 5 Wireless, 3Shape, Denmark) after applying scannig sprey (Dr. Mat) to increase visibility and readability. The scanned disk was then transferred to the Exocad dental modeling software program (Exocad Gmbh, Align Technology Inc.). Samples were resized to 1, 2, and 3 mm in Exocad dental modeling software. During the design process, the NextDent printing parameters were set to 123.488 mm on the X-axis, 69.484 mm on the Y-axis, and 195 mm on the Z-axis, with a layer thickness of 50 microns. Rotation was configured at 0.00 degrees and translation was set to 0.00 mm.The prepared samples were then directed to the printer (NextDent 5100, NextDent, 3D Systems) for production. The 3D printer was then instructed to produce the ready-made models. Ten minutes per layer was the production speed at which the printing process was carried out. After being removed from the printer, the specimens were immersed in 99% isopropyl alcohol for 5 min, followed by rinsing and drying, and then post-cured in the post-curing device (LC-3D Print Box) for periods of 20 min and 25 min16,17. A total of 54 specimens were produced. Post-curing was applied to 27 of the specimens for 20 min, and to the other 27 for 25 min (Fig. 1).Fig. 1Digital three-dimensional (3D) model of the disks used in this study. The models were designed using 3D Sprint Basic software (version 2025.1.0; 3D Systems, https://www.3dsystems.com/software/3d-sprint) and fabricated with the NextDent 5100 3D printer (NextDent, 3D Systems).Full size imageDisk-shaped specimens (10 mm diameter, 1–3 mm thickness) were chosen to ensure standardized and reproducible assessment of optical and mechanical properties. The use of flat, uniform samples helps minimize experimental variability associated with anatomical complexity, thus providing consistent and comparable results across all groups. However, we acknowledge that this design does not fully mimic the geometry of actual dental restorations, which may affect the clinical translatability of our findings.The selected post-curing times (20 and 25 min) were based on the manufacturer’s recommendations and previous studies that demonstrated their impact on optical and mechanical properties7,12.In this study, quantitative baseline color measurement (L, a, b, C, H) of the disks were conducted utilizing the Vita Easyshade V spectrophotometer (Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen,Germany) against white and black backgrounds. Understanding the influence of thickness on TP helps clinicians select appropriate restoration dimensions that balance esthetic needs with mechanical stability. The calculation of the translucency parameter (TP) followed the equation:\(\:TP=\sqrt{{({L}_{B}-{L}_{W})}^{2}+{({a}_{B}-{a}_{W})}^{2}+{({b}_{B}-{b}_{W})}^{2}}\) ,where L_black, a_black, and b_black represent the L*, a*, and b* values measured against the black background, respectively. Correspondingly, L_white, a_white and b_white denote the respective values obtained against the white background. Before each measurement session, the spectrophotometer underwent recalibration, and all measurements were consistently performed by a single investigator under uniform brightness conditions17.$$\Delta {\text{E}}_{{00}} {\text{~}} = ~\sqrt {~~\left( {\frac{{\Delta L}}{{K_{L} \cdot S_{L} }}} \right)~^{2} + ~~~\left( {\frac{{\Delta C}}{{K_{C} \cdot S_{C} }}} \right)~^{2} ~~ + ~~\left( {\frac{{\Delta H}}{{K_{H} \cdot S_{H} }}} \right)~^{2} ~ + ~R_{T} ~~\left( {\frac{{\Delta C}}{{K_{C} \cdot S_{C} }}} \right)~~\left( {\frac{{\Delta H}}{{K_{H} \cdot S_{H} }}} \right)}$$The L*, a*, b*, C* and H* values were measured against both white and black backgrounds, with parametric values of KL, KC, and KH set to 1. In the CIEDE2000 formula, the RT term serves as a rotation function that accounts for the interactive effect of chroma and hue differences, particularly enhancing the formula’s perceptual accuracy in the blue region of color space. This adjustment ensures that calculated color differences more closely reflect what is observed visually, which is critical for accurate evaluation of dental materials14,15,18.Vickers hardness testVickers hardness was measured using disk-shaped specimens with a diameter of 10 mm and a thickness of 1, 2 and, 3 mm. The size of the specimen was measured after curing using a digital caliper with an accuracy of 0.01 mm. After drying the 3D printed sample in a desiccator for 24 h, the hardness was measured at ambient laboratory temperature (24.5°–25.5 °C) using a micro-Vickers hardness tester (n = 9, indentation applied with 100 g load for 10 s; HMV-2, Shimadzu). Each sample was measured three times on upper surfaces, and the average value was calculated.All specimens were produced and processed using identical protocols and devices, and all measurements were performed by a single calibrated operator. No randomization procedure was implemented, as all samples were fabricated in a uniform batch under controlled laboratory conditions to ensure standardization.Clinical trial number: not applicable.Statistical analysisThe sample size was determined in accordance with commonly accepted protocols in dental materials research, with reference to previous studies employing similar group sizes14,15. The Shapiro-Wilk test was conducted to assess the normality of the data distribution. For data that were normally distributed with homogeneous variances, one-way ANOVA was used to compare groups, followed by Bonferroni post hoc tests. For data sets that did not conform to normality or homogeneity, nonparametric tests were utilized. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to evaluate differences between groups, and post hoc pairwise comparisons were performed using the Bonferroni-adjusted Mann-Whitney U test. Statistical significance was set at P 19,21.The observed colour variations between different thicknesses and post curing times also deserve attention. Although not explicitly discussed in the null hypothesis, the variation in colour with changing thicknesses and post-curing times underscores the multifaceted nature of 3D printing material properties. Future research could delve deeper into understanding the underlying mechanisms contributing to these colour differences and their potential implications for dental applications22. Additionally, variations in color stability due to different filler compositions and light exposure during post-curing should be explored in future studies to optimize the clinical application of these materials.In light of these findings, it is evident that both thickness and post-curing time significantly influence the translucency parameter of the NextDent provisional resin. However, further studies are warranted to investigate additional factors that may influence material properties and to optimise post-curing protocols for different resin types. This is particularly critical for ensuring that provisional restorations meet the esthetic and functional demands of both anterior and posterior applications.The translucency of acrylic materials adds vitality and lifelike appearance to a provisional restoration. To achieve the best esthetics, a restorative material should interact with light like a natural tooth. The translucency parameters of 1 mm sections of human dentin and enamel have been reported to be to 16.4 and 18.7. These values should define the translucency target for potential provisional restorative materials23.In the field of dentistry, the 50:50% translucency perceptibility threshold (TPT) for CIELAB has been determined as 1.33, with the corresponding CIEDE 2000 TPT value being 0.62. Additionally, the 50:50% translucency acceptability threshold (TAT) for CIELAB in dentistry has been established as 4.43, with the corresponding CIEDE 2000 TAT value being 2.6224. From the results presented in the present research, it is evident that there are significant differences in Translucency Perceptibility (TP) between the groups at two different post curing time intervals and thicknesses. For example, at a post-cure time of 20 min, the TP values decrease as the thickness increases from 1 mm to 3 mm, with statistically significant differences observed (P = .000). However, at a post-cure time of 25 min, while the TP values follow a similar trend, the differences in TP become insignificant as the thickness increases (P = .056 for 2 mm thickness and P = .191 for 3 mm thickness). These results suggest that post curing time has a significant effect on TP, particularly at thinner thicknesses, while thicker specimens show reduced sensitivity to variations in post curing time. When comparing these results in relation to thickness and post curing time, our results show that thinner specimens exhibit greater sensitivity to variations in post curing time, with significant differences in TP observed at different post curing intervals. Conversely, thicker specimens show reduced sensitivity to changes in post curing time, as indicated by the insignificant differences in TP at longer post curing intervals. This suggests that the effect of post curing time on translucency perception varies with specimen thickness, with thinner specimens being more affected by variations in post curing time than thicker specimens. These findings have direct clinical implications. Thinner specimens could be prioritized in esthetically demanding areas, while thicker specimens may suffice for posterior restorations where translucency is less critical but mechanical strength is paramount.The Vickers hardness test results determined in our study show that the increase in polymerization time does not significantly affect the microhardness. However, it was observed that 1 mm thick specimens exhibited higher microhardness values. In a similar study, Lombardini et al.11 reported that the curing time did not affect the hardness ratio values. Yap et al.25 used 2 mm specimens in their study to ensure homogeneous and maximum polymerization. It is thought that the change in 1 mm specimens in our study can be attributed to this. These results highlight the complexity of polymerization depth in relation to thickness. Future studies should evaluate whether longer post-curing durations might enhance microhardness, particularly in thicker specimens where light penetration might be insufficient.The higher microhardness values observed in the 1 mm thick samples may be associated with more effective and uniform light penetration during polymerization, which can promote the formation of a denser and more complete polymer network near the surface. As specimen thickness increases, light attenuation may limit the degree of conversion and crosslinking in the deeper regions, which could lead to lower hardness values in thicker samples. Previous studies have reported similar trends, suggesting that thinner resin-based materials generally tend to achieve higher surface hardness due to improved curing efficiency11,25.This study examined the microhardness values and translucency parameters of samples with different thicknesses (1 mm, 2 mm, and 3 mm) and postpolymerization times (20 and 25 min). However, this study has several limitations. First, it was conducted under in vitro conditions using flat surfaces, which may not accurately represent in vivo conditions. For instance, curved surfaces or irregular geometries typical of dental restorations might exhibit different optical and mechanical properties. In addition, the study focused only on microhardness and translucency parameters, neglecting other potentially important factors such as surface properties, microbial adherence, and other mechanical properties. Future research should consider evaluating these additional parameters. In addition, the study was limited to a small number of one type of printing material. Future research could expand the scope to include a wider variety of printing resin materials and processes, taking into account factors such as filler content and polymerization effects on mechanical properties. Finally, it should be noted that the results of the study may not be directly applicable to clinical applications due to the use of flat specimens, which differ from actual tooth shapes. Further studies should replicate these findings using clinically relevant tooth geometries to ensure better applicability in dental practice. A limitation of this study is the use of flat, disk-shaped specimens rather than anatomically contoured restorations. While geometric standardization increases reproducibility for in vitro evaluation, it may not fully reflect the clinical situation, where anatomical complexity and varying thicknesses can influence material behavior. Future studies should incorporate anatomically realistic models to provide more clinically relevant data. The relatively small sample size per group may reduce the statistical power to detect subtle differences. Nevertheless, this sample size is consistent with widely accepted protocols in in vitro dental materials research, where group sizes of 8–10 are considered both ethical and practical14,15. This approach enables comparability with previous studies and reflects common constraints in the field.All measurements in this study were conducted by a single operator under controlled laboratory conditions; inter- and intra-operator variability was not evaluated and may affect reproducibility. Additionally, while laboratory temperature was monitored, other environmental variables such as humidity were not specifically controlled, which may influence optical and mechanical outcomes. Future studies should address these factors and also investigate long-term color stability, thermocycling, and wear resistance to enhance clinical relevance and translational value.ConclusionsUnderstanding the color behavior of dental materials is essential for producing reliable dental restorations and advancing material development. In the context of fabricating provisional fixed prostheses using NextDent provisional resin, the optical behavior of the material can be evaluated by measuring L*, a*, b*, c, and h values on black and white backgrounds. This evaluation enables the calculation of translucency, a crucial factor in determining the material’s esthetic and functional performance for clinical use. Additionally, the microhardness values observed in this study were lower than the hardness of tooth enamel, supporting the material’s suitability for use in dental restorations without causing excessive wear on natural teeth.Data availabilityThe data supporting the findings of this study are fully available within the article.Abbreviationsdf:Degrees of freedomF:F-statisticSig.:SignificanceSum of Squares:Total varianceMean Square:Average varianceReferencesSiqueira, J. R. C. dos et al. Characterization of microstructure, optical properties, and mechanical behavior of a temporary 3D printing resin: impact of Post-Curing time. Mater. (Basel). 17, 1496 (2024).Jain, S. et al. Physical and mechanical properties of 3D-Printed provisional crowns and fixed dental prosthesis resins compared to CAD/CAM milled and conventional provisional resins: A systematic review and Meta-Analysis. Polym. (Basel). 14, 2691 (2022).Google Scholar Pituru, S. M. et al. A review on the biocompatibility of PMMA-Based dental materials for interim prosthetic restorations with a glimpse into their modern manufacturing techniques. Mater. (Basel). 13, 2894 (2020).ADS Google Scholar Balestra, D. et al. 3D printed materials for permanent restorations in indirect restorative and prosthetic dentistry: A critical review of the literature. Mater. (Basel). 17, 1380 (2024).ADS Google Scholar Ranka, S. et al. Comparative evaluation of two different Fiber-Reinforced composite materials in class 1 Post-Endodontic restorations in Molars—A randomized clinical study. Mater. (Basel). 15, 7858 (2022).ADS Google Scholar Dimitrova, M., Chuchulska, B., Zlatev, S. & Kazakova, R. Colour stability of 3D-Printed and prefabricated denture teeth after immersion in different colouring Agents—An in vitro study. Polym. (Basel). 14, 3125 (2022).Google Scholar Kim, D. et al. Effects of Post-Curing time on the mechanical and color properties of Three-Dimensional printed crown and Bridge materials. Polym. (Basel). 12, 2762 (2020).Google Scholar Bayindir, F. & Koseoglu, M. The effect of restoration thickness and resin cement shade on the color and translucency of a high-translucency monolithic zirconia. J. Prosthet. Dent. 123, 149–154 (2020).Google Scholar Awad, D., Stawarczyk, B., Liebermann, A. & Ilie, N. Translucency of esthetic dental restorative CAD/CAM materials and composite resins with respect to thickness and surface roughness. J. Prosthet. Dent. 113, 534–540 (2015).Google Scholar Donmez, M. B., Olcay, E. O. & Demirel, M. Load-to-Failure resistance and optical characteristics of Nano-Lithium disilicate ceramic after different aging processes. Mater. (Basel). 15, 4011 (2022).ADS Google Scholar Lombardini, M., Chiesa, M., Scribante, A., Colombo, M. & Poggio, C. Influence of polymerization time and depth of cure of resin composites determined by Vickers hardness. Dent. Res. J. (Isfahan). 9, 735–740 (2012).Google Scholar Kang, M-J., Lim, J-H., Lee, C-G. & Kim, J-E. Effects of Post-Curing light intensity on the mechanical properties and Three-Dimensional printing accuracy of interim dental material. Mater. (Basel). 15, 6889 (2022).ADS Google Scholar Lassila, L., Mangoush, E., He, J., Vallittu, P. K. & Garoushi, S. Effect of Post-Printing conditions on the mechanical and optical properties of 3D-Printed dental resin. Polym. (Basel). 16, 1713 (2024).Google Scholar Salas, M. et al. Translucency thresholds for dental materials. Dent. Mater. 34, 1168–1174 (2018).Google Scholar KARAKAŞ, S. N. Investigation of optical properties of a bioactive resin material in different thickness: an in vitro study. Turkiye Klin. J. Dent. Sci. 29, 481–490 (2023).Google Scholar Wan, Q. et al. Wear resistance of additively manufactured resin with different printing parameters and postpolymerization conditions. Int. J. Prosthodont. 37, s55–62 (2024).Google Scholar Gad, M. M. et al. Strength and wear behavior of Three-Dimensional printed and prefabricated denture teeth: an in vitro comparative analysis. Eur. J. Dent. 17, 1248–1256 (2023).Google Scholar FİDAN, M., TRANSLÜSENSİ ÖZELLİĞİNİN POLİSAJ UYGULANAN KOMPOZİT, D. E. R. E. L. İ. Z. & REZİNLERDE CIELAB VE CIEDE RENK SİSTEMLERİNE GÖRE KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI. Selcuk Dent. J. ;8:477–485. (2021).Google Scholar Espinar, C., Della Bona, A., Pérez, M. M. & Pulgar, R. Color and optical properties of 3D printing restorative polymer-based materials: A scoping review. J. Esthet Restor. Dent. 34, 853–864 (2022).Google Scholar El-khayat, H., Katamish, H., El-Etreby, A. & Aboushahba, M. Effect of varying thickness and artificial aging on color and translucency of cubic zirconia and lithium disilicate ceramics. Brazilian Dent. Sci. ;24. (2021).Jahani, Y., Baena, M., Barris, C., Perera, R. & Torres, L. Influence of curing, post-curing and testing temperatures on mechanical properties of a structural adhesive. Constr. Build. Mater. 324, 126698 (2022).Google Scholar Alp, G., Subasi, M. G., Johnston, W. M. & Yilmaz, B. Effect of surface treatments and coffee thermocycling on the color and translucency of CAD-CAM monolithic glass-ceramic. J. Prosthet. Dent. 120, 263–268 (2018).Google Scholar Yu, B., Ahn, J-S. & Lee, Y-K. Measurement of translucency of tooth enamel and dentin. Acta Odontol. Scand. 67, 57–64 (2009).Google Scholar Taşın, S. & Ismatullaev, A. Effect of coffee thermocycling on the color and translucency of milled and 3D printed definitive restoration materials. J. Prosthet. Dent. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.01.021 (2024).Article Google Scholar Yap, A. U. Effectiveness of polymerization in composite restoratives claiming bulk placement: impact of cavity depth and exposure time. Oper. Dent. 25, 113–120 (2000).Google Scholar Download referencesAcknowledgementsNot applicable.FundingNot applicable.Author informationAuthors and AffiliationsProsthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Bahcelievler Mah. Mitat Pasa Cad, 15100, Merkez, Burdur, TurkeyHayriye Yasemin Yay KuscuProsthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Adiyaman University, Adiyaman, TurkeyZuhal GorusAuthorsHayriye Yasemin Yay KuscuView author publicationsSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarZuhal GorusView author publicationsSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarContributionsHYYK: conceptualization, methodology, investigation, statistical analysis, data interpretation, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing; ZG: writing-original draft, writing-review and editing. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.Corresponding authorCorrespondence to Hayriye Yasemin Yay Kuscu.Ethics declarationsCompeting interestsThe authors declare no competing interests.Ethics approval and consent to participateThis study did not involve human participants or animals; therefore, ethical approval was not required. The research focused solely on in vitro experimentation using 3D-printed provisional restoration materials.Consent for publicationNot applicable.Additional informationPublisher’s noteSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.Rights and permissionsOpen Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.Reprints and permissionsAbout this article