Literature DB >> 28781073

Accuracy of stereolithography additive casts used in a digital workflow.

Hiba Al-Imam1, Mia Gram2, Ana R Benetti3, Klaus Gotfredsen4.   

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Despite the increasing demand for a digital workflow in the fabrication of indirect restorations, information on the accuracy of the resulting definitive casts is limited.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of definitive casts produced with digital scans and conventional impressions.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Chamfer preparations were made on the maxillary right canine and second molar of a typodont. Subsequently, 9 conventional impressions were made to produce 9 gypsum casts, and 9 digital scans were made to produce stereolithography additive (SLA) casts from 2 manufacturers: 9 Dreve SLA casts and 9 Scanbiz SLA casts. All casts were then scanned 9 times with an extraoral scanner to produce the reference data set. Trueness was evaluated by superimposing the data sets obtained by scanning the casts with the reference data set. Precision was evaluated by analyzing the deviations among repeated scans. The root mean square (RMS) and percentage of points aligned within the nominal values (±50 μm) of the 3-dimensional analysis were calculated by the software.
RESULTS: Gypsum had the best alignment (within 50 μm) with the reference data set (median 95.3%, IQR 16.7) and the least RMS (median 25.8 μm, IQR 14.6), followed by Dreve and Scanbiz. Differences in RMS were observed between gypsum and the SLA casts (P<.001). Within 50 μm, gypsum was superior to Scanbiz (P<.001). Gypsum casts exhibited the highest precision, showing the best alignment (within 50 μm) and the least RMS, followed by Scanbiz and Dreve.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found that gypsum casts had higher accuracy than SLA casts. Within 50 μm, gypsum casts were better than Scanbiz SLA casts, while gypsum casts and Dreve SLA casts had similar trueness. Significant differences were found among the investigated SLA casts used in the digital workflow.
Copyright © 2017 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28781073     DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.05.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prosthet Dent        ISSN: 0022-3913            Impact factor:   3.426


  11 in total

Review 1.  Bioprinting of freestanding vascular grafts and the regulatory considerations for additively manufactured vascular prostheses.

Authors:  Sara Abdollahi; Joseph Boktor; Narutoshi Hibino
Journal:  Transl Res       Date:  2019-06-03       Impact factor: 7.012

2.  Letter to the editor.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 1.938

3.  A comparison of trueness and precision of 12 3D printers used in dentistry.

Authors:  Adam Nulty
Journal:  BDJ Open       Date:  2022-05-26

4.  Three-Dimensional Evaluation on Accuracy of Conventional and Milled Gypsum Models and 3D Printed Photopolymer Models.

Authors:  Jae-Won Choi; Jong-Ju Ahn; Keunbada Son; Jung-Bo Huh
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2019-10-25       Impact factor: 3.623

5.  The step further smile virtual planning: milled versus prototyped mock-ups for the evaluation of the designed smile characteristics.

Authors:  Antonino Lo Giudice; Luca Ortensi; Marco Farronato; Alessandra Lucchese; Erica Lo Castro; Gaetano Isola
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2020-06-05       Impact factor: 2.757

6.  Comparison between Additive and Subtractive CAD-CAM Technique to Produce Orthognathic Surgical Splints: A Personalized Approach.

Authors:  Giuseppe Palazzo; Vincenzo Ronsivalle; Giacomo Oteri; Antonino Lo Giudice; Corrado Toro; Paola Campagna; Romeo Patini; Salvatore Bocchieri; Alberto Bianchi; Gaetano Isola
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2020-12-11

7.  Effect of rinsing time on the accuracy of interim crowns fabricated by digital light processing: An in vitro study.

Authors:  Beom-Il Lee; Seung-Gyu You; Seung-Min You; Seen-Young Kang; Ji-Hwan Kim
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2021-02-23       Impact factor: 1.904

8.  Effect of post-rinsing time and method on accuracy of denture base manufactured with stereolithography.

Authors:  Awutsadaporn Katheng; Manabu Kanazawa; Yuriko Komagamine; Maiko Iwaki; Sahaprom Namano; Shunsuke Minakuchi
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 1.904

9.  Accuracy of provisional crowns made using stereolithography apparatus and subtractive technique.

Authors:  Seen-Young Kang; Jung-Hyun Park; Ji-Hwan Kim; Woong-Chul Kim
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 1.904

10.  Evaluation of marginal discrepancy of pressable ceramic veneer fabricated using CAD/CAM system: Additive and subtractive manufacturing.

Authors:  Seen-Young Kang; Ha-Na Lee; Ji-Hwan Kim; Woong-Chul Kim
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 1.904

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.