Purpose: To evaluate the mechanical properties of the 3D printed provisional restoration material that was repaired using different materials. Material and Methods: The bar specimens have been manufactured using three-dimensional printing technology in accordance with the ISO 10477:2020 standards and divided into 5 groups randomly. For repair material application and replacement on the standardized silicone mold, the test specimens were ground at the center by 1x2x2 mm. No grinding was done on the control group specimens. Flowable composite, bis-acrylic composite resin, polymethyl methacrylate resin, and temporary 3D printing resin are utilized as repair materials (n=16). The specimens underwent a three-point-bending (3PB) test, with a cross-head speed of 1mm/min, in order to assess their flexural strength (FS) and flexural modulus (FM). The data received statistical analysis with one-way ANOVA and Tukey test. A Weibull analysis was performed, and the Weibull modulus of specimens was calculated. Results: Control group specimens were showed the highest FS (142±12.6 MPa) and FM (4497±1205 MPa) values. Among the test groups, the utilization of temporary 3D printing resin as a repair material exhibited the greatest FS (67±33.3 MPa) values and showed statistical significance when compared to all other groups. Conclusion: Repairing 3D-printed provisional resin material weakens its mechanical properties. However, utilizing the own resin made of 3D-printed provisional resin material can be an effective choice for implementing minor modifications and additions.
