# A Comprehensive Review of Polymeric Materials and Additive Manufacturing in Dental Crown Fabrication: State of the Art, Challenges, and Opportunities

## TL;DR

This review explores the rise of 3D-printed polymeric dental crowns as a promising alternative to traditional ceramic crowns, highlighting their benefits and current limitations.

## Contribution

The paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the state of the art in polymeric dental crown fabrication using additive manufacturing, identifying key challenges and future opportunities.

## Key findings

- Polymeric materials offer advantages like better bonding and aesthetics but lack the mechanical strength of ceramics.
- Standardized testing and long-term clinical data are missing, hindering widespread adoption.
- Future innovations like 4D printing and bioactive materials could enhance functionality and performance.

## Abstract

For decades, zirconia- and ceramic-based materials have dominated dental crown fabrication due to their durability and aesthetic appeal. However, a fundamental shift is occurring as polymeric alternatives emerge with notable advantages: better adhesive bonding, versatile aesthetics, lower costs, and a lighter weight. The advances in polymer chemistry and additive manufacturing have significantly impacted prosthodontics, allowing the rapid creation of highly customized, patient-specific restorations with a precision previously impossible (achieved through advanced Computer-Aided Design software and standardized 3D-printing equipment) with traditional methods. This review provides a detailed analysis of 3D-printed polymeric dental crowns from various angles. It explores the materials science behind different polymers, compares manufacturing methods, and evaluates the mechanical performance and biocompatibility. Despite the progress, polymeric materials still fall short of matching the mechanical properties of advanced ceramics, especially in compressive strength and wear resistance. Moreover, there is limited long-term clinical data over five to ten years. The lack of standardized testing protocols complicates cross-study comparisons, and the regulatory pathways for patient-specific 3D-printed devices are still developing, creating uncertainty for manufacturers and clinicians. The future prospective looks promising in many ways such as innovations like four-dimensional printing, where materials respond dynamically to environmental stimuli, which could enable crowns that adapt to changing oral conditions. Nanocomposites with functionalized nanoparticles might enhance mechanical properties while maintaining printability. AI-driven design optimization could automate and improve the crown morphology, occlusal contacts, and fit. Incorporating bioactive materials could turn crowns into active therapeutic devices that promote remineralization and combat bacterial colonization. This review summarizes the current knowledge, highlights the key gaps, and suggests steps toward establishing polymeric 3D-printed crowns as viable long-term alternatives capable of competing with or surpassing traditional ceramic options.