Literature DB >> 31172199

Influence of the three-dimensional printing technique and printing layer thickness on model accuracy.

Zhe-Chen Zhang1, Pei-Lun Li1, Feng-Ting Chu1, Gang Shen2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The accuracies of three-dimensional (3D) printed dental models using various digital light processing (DLP) and stereolithography (SLA) printers at different thicknesses were compared.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on digital dental models (originally digitized using R700; 3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark), physical dental models were printed using three types of DLP printers: (1) EvoDent (UnionTec, Shanghai, China) with layer thicknesses of 50 μm and 100 μm; (2) EncaDent (Encashape, WuXi, China) with layer thicknesses of 20, 30, 50 and 100 μm; (3) Vida HD (Envisioned, Dearborn, MI, USA) with layer thicknesses of 50 and 100 μm. Models with the SLA printer Form 2 (Formlabs, Somerville, MA, USA) were printed with layer thicknesses of 25, 50 and 100 μm. All 22 printed models were converted to digital dental models using a D2000 model scanner (3 Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) and compared three-dimensionally to the source files using Geomagic Qualify 12.0 (3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA).
RESULTS: The printing accuracy of all printers was higher at 50 μm. When the layer thickness was set at 100 μm, the printing speed and printing accuracy of DLP printer were both superior to those of the SLA printer. In all groups, the EvoDent 50 μm group had the highest consistency with the source files (mean absolute deviation of 0.0233 mm in the maxilla and 0.0301 mm in the mandible). While the accuracy of Form 2 100 μm group was the lowest (mean absolute deviation of 0.0511 mm in the maxilla and 0.0570 mm in the mandible).
CONCLUSION: For the 3D printers studied, 50 μm was the optimum layer thickness for DLP technology, and the printing accuracy using SLA technology increased with decreasing layer thickness. The DLP technology also had higher printing accuracy at a layer thickness of 100 μm. EvoDent 50 μm had the highest and Form 2 100 μm the lowest printing accuracy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Digital light processing; Geomagic software; Orthodontic models; Stereolithography; Three-dimensional superimposition

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31172199     DOI: 10.1007/s00056-019-00180-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orofac Orthop        ISSN: 1434-5293            Impact factor:   1.938


  21 in total

Review 1.  Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review.

Authors:  P S Fleming; V Marinho; A Johal
Journal:  Orthod Craniofac Res       Date:  2010-11-22       Impact factor: 1.826

2.  Accuracy and surgical feasibility of a CBCT-based stereolithographic surgical guide aiding autotransplantation of teeth: in vitro validation.

Authors:  M Shahbazian; R Jacobs; J Wyatt; G Willems; V Pattijn; E Dhoore; C VAN Lierde; F Vinckier
Journal:  J Oral Rehabil       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.837

3.  Accuracy and reproducibility of dental replica models reconstructed by different rapid prototyping techniques.

Authors:  Aletta Hazeveld; James J R Huddleston Slater; Yijin Ren
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.650

4.  A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy.

Authors:  Andrew P Keating; Jeremy Knox; Richard Bibb; Alexei I Zhurov
Journal:  J Orthod       Date:  2008-09

5.  Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions--an in-vitro study.

Authors:  A Ender; A Mehl
Journal:  Int J Comput Dent       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.883

6.  Accuracy and reproducibility of 3-dimensional digital model measurements.

Authors:  Marinês Vieira S Sousa; Eliziane Cossetin Vasconcelos; Guilherme Janson; Daniela Garib; Arnaldo Pinzan
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.650

7.  Comparative evaluation of dimension and surface detail accuracy of models produced by three different rapid prototype techniques.

Authors:  K Murugesan; Ponsekar Abraham Anandapandian; Sumeet Kumar Sharma; M Vasantha Kumar
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2011-09-21

8.  Accuracy, reproducibility, and time efficiency of dental measurements using different technologies.

Authors:  Thorsten Grünheid; Nishant Patel; Nanci L De Felippe; Andrew Wey; Philippe R Gaillard; Brent E Larson
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 2.650

9.  Qualitative and quantitative three-dimensional accuracy of a single tooth captured by elastomeric impression materials: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Oliver Schaefer; Monika Schmidt; Roland Goebel; Harald Kuepper
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 3.426

10.  Possibility of reconstruction of dental plaster cast from 3D digital study models.

Authors:  Magdalena Kasparova; Lucie Grafova; Petr Dvorak; Tatjana Dostalova; Ales Prochazka; Hana Eliasova; Josef Prusa; Soroush Kakawand
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2013-05-31       Impact factor: 2.819

View more
  20 in total

1.  Mechanical evaluation for three-dimensional printed orthodontic springs with different heights-in vitro study.

Authors:  Dragan Ströbele; Ahmed Othman; Vasilios Alevizakos; Mesut Turan; Constantin von See
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2021-10-01

2.  The accuracy and reliability of 3D printed aortic templates: a comprehensive three-dimensional analysis.

Authors:  Pawel Rynio; Maciej Wojtuń; Łukasz Wójcik; Miłosz Kawa; Aleksander Falkowski; Piotr Gutowski; Arkadiusz Kazimierczak
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2022-02

3.  Impact of Aging on the Accuracy of 3D-Printed Dental Models: An In Vitro Investigation.

Authors:  Tim Joda; Lea Matthisson; Nicola U Zitzmann
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-05-12       Impact factor: 4.241

4.  Surface Characteristics of Milled and 3D Printed Denture Base Materials Following Polishing and Coating: An In-Vitro Study.

Authors:  Pablo Kraemer Fernandez; Alexey Unkovskiy; Viola Benkendorff; Andrea Klink; Sebastian Spintzyk
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 3.623

5.  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

6.  Evaluation of the 3D Printing Accuracy of a Dental Model According to Its Internal Structure and Cross-Arch Plate Design: An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Seung-Ho Shin; Jung-Hwa Lim; You-Jung Kang; Jee-Hwan Kim; June-Sung Shim; Jong-Eun Kim
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2020-11-28       Impact factor: 3.623

7.  Accuracy of different tooth surfaces on 3D printed dental models: orthodontic perspective.

Authors:  Ting Dong; Xiaoting Wang; Lunguo Xia; Lingjun Yuan; Niansong Ye; Bing Fang
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 2.757

8.  In vitro comparison of cleaning efficacy and force of cylindric interdental brush versus an interdental rubber pick.

Authors:  Christian Graetz; Kristina Schoepke; Johanna Rabe; Susanne Schorr; Antje Geiken; David Christofzik; Thomas Rinder; Christof E Dörfer; Sonja Sälzer
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2021-04-14       Impact factor: 2.757

9.  Evaluation of the accuracy of orthodontic models prototyped with entry-level LCD-based 3D printers: a study using surface-based superimposition and deviation analysis.

Authors:  Antonino Lo Giudice; Vincenzo Ronsivalle; Lorenzo Rustico; Kaled Aboulazm; Gaetano Isola; Giuseppe Palazzo
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-06-07       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 10.  Advances in 3D Printing for Tissue Engineering.

Authors:  Angelika Zaszczyńska; Maryla Moczulska-Heljak; Arkadiusz Gradys; Paweł Sajkiewicz
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 3.623

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.