Dimensional accuracy of extrusion- and photopolymerization-based 3D printers: In vitro study comparing printed casts.


Journal

The Journal of prosthetic dentistry
ISSN: 1097-6841
Titre abrégé: J Prosthet Dent
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0376364

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jan 2021
Historique:
received: 09 05 2019
revised: 05 11 2019
accepted: 06 11 2019
pubmed: 18 2 2020
medline: 5 1 2021
entrez: 18 2 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Reliable studies comparing the accuracy of complete-arch casts from 3D printers are scarce. The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the accuracy of casts printed by using various extrusion- and photopolymerization-based printers. A master file was sent to 5 printer manufacturers and distributors to print 37 identical casts. This file consisted of a standardized data set of a maxillary cast in standard tessellation language (STL) format comprising 5 reference points for the measurement of 3 distances that served as reference for all measurements: intermolar width (IMW), intercanine width (ICW), and dental arch length (AL). The digital measurement of the master file obtained by using a surveying software program (Convince Premium 2012) was used as the control. Two extrusion-based (M2 and Ultimaker 2+) and 3 photopolymerization-based printers (Form 2, Asiga MAX UV, and myrev140) were compared. The casts were measured by using a multisensory coordinate measuring machine (O-Inspect 422). The values were then compared with those of the master file. The Mann-Whitney U test and Levene tests were used to determine significant differences in the trueness and precision (accuracy) of the measured distances. The deviations from the master file at all 3 distances for the included printers ranged between 12 μm and 240 μm (trueness), with an interquartile range (IQR) between 17 μm and 388 μm (precision). Asiga MAX UV displayed the highest accuracy, considering all the distances, and Ultimaker 2+ demonstrated comparable accuracy for shorter distances (IMW and ICW). Although myrev140 operated with high precision, it displayed high deviations from the master file. Similarly, although Form 2 exhibited high IQR, it did not deviate significantly from the master file in the longest range (AL). M2 performed consistently. Both extrusion-based and photopolymerization-based printers were accurate. In general, inexpensive printers were no less accurate than more expensive ones.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32063385
pii: S0022-3913(19)30748-6
doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.11.011
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

103-110

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2019 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Norbert Nestler (N)

Doctoral student, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Center for Dental and Craniofacial Sciences (CC3), Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: norbert.nestler@charite.de.

Christian Wesemann (C)

Graduate student, Department of Prosthodontics, Geriatric Dentistry and Craniomandibular Disorders, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany.

Benedikt C Spies (BC)

Privatdozent, Department of Prosthodontics, Geriatric Dentistry and Craniomandibular Disorders, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany.

Florian Beuer (F)

Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Geriatric Dentistry and Craniomandibular Disorders, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany.

Axel Bumann (A)

Professor, Mesantis 3D Dental Radiologicum, Clinic of Orthodontics, Berlin, Germany.

Articles similaires

Selecting optimal software code descriptors-The case of Java.

Yegor Bugayenko, Zamira Kholmatova, Artem Kruglov et al.
1.00
Software Algorithms Programming Languages

Exploring blood-brain barrier passage using atomic weighted vector and machine learning.

Yoan Martínez-López, Paulina Phoobane, Yanaima Jauriga et al.
1.00
Blood-Brain Barrier Machine Learning Humans Support Vector Machine Software
Cephalometry Humans Anatomic Landmarks Software Internet
Humans Algorithms Software Artificial Intelligence Computer Simulation

Classifications MeSH