Abstract: Objective To study the feasibility of making temporary aesthetic templates with 3D printing, and to compare the marginal adaptation of the aesthetic templates made by DMG Luxatemp and self-curing resin. Methods According to the unified standard of tooth preparation, two units, four units and six units of tooth preparation were made for 3 standard models of maxillary resin teeth, and 26 models of plaster cast were made. 3D printing, DMG Luxatemp and self-curing resin were used to make 5 two-unit crowns,5 four-unit crowns and 5 six-unit crowns respectively. The gap value of each group was measured by the gap replication method of silicone rubber and magnified 40 times under the stereo microscope. SPSS20.0 statistical analysis software was used to analyze the experimental data. Results There was a significant difference between the 3D group, DMG Luxatemp group and the self-curing resin group in the value of the gap between two-unit crowns, four-unit crowns and six-unit crowns (P<0.05).The edge clearance values of 3D printing group were (78.02±0.65)， (78.04±0.66)and（78.48±0.65)μm.The edge clearance values of DMG Luxatemp group were (101.24±1.61)， (100.71±1.60)and（99.37±1.38)μm. The edge clearance values of self-curing resin group were (154.62±9.69)， (155.76±4.39)and（152.34±5.21)μm. The best marginal adaptation was the 3D group, followed by Luxatemp group, and the worst margianl adaptation was the self-curing group. However, there was no statistical difference in the gap value between the two-unit crowns, the four-unit crowns and the six-unit crowns in the same group. Conclusion The marginal adaptation of the temporary esthetic templates made by 3D printing is better than DMG Luxatemp and self-curing resin.

Key words: 3D printing, aesthetic template, marginal adaptation