In vitro accuracies of 3D printed models manufactured by two different printing technologies

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to compare the accuracies of full-arch models printed by two different 3D printing technologies. Materials and Methods A mandibular horseshoe-shaped master model was designed with RapidForm XOR2 software The master model was printed 10 times with 3D printers using direct light processing (DLP) and PolyJet technology (n=20). The printed models were then scanned with an industrial scanner and saved in STL file. All digital models superimposed with the master model STL file and comparison of the trueness was performed using Geomagic Control 3D analysis software. The precision was calculated by superimposing combinations of the 10 data sets in each group. Results The trueness of printed models was 46 μm for the DLP printer and 51 μm for PolyJet printer; however, this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.155). The precision of printed models was 43 μm for the DLP printer and 54 μm for PolyJet printer. DLP printed models were more precise than the PolyJet printed models (p<0.001). Conclusion The 3D printing technologies showed significant differences in the trueness of full-arch measurements. Although DLP printed models had better trueness than PolyJet printed models, all of the 3D printed models were clinically acceptable and might be used for the production of fixed restorations.

Keywords

• 3D printing
• Direct light processing
• Polyjet
• Trueness
• Precision

References

1. 1. de Paula Silveira AC, Chaves SB, Hilgert LA, Ribeiro AP. Marginal and internal fit of CAD-CAM-fabricated composite resin and ceramic crowns scanned by 2 intraoral cameras. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:386-92. [CrossRef] google scholar
2. 2. Kim W-T. Accuracy of dental models fabricated by CAD/CAM milling method and 3D printing method. J Oral Res 2018;7:127-33. [CrossRef] google scholar
3. 3. Emir F, Piskin B, Sipahi C. Effect of dental technician disparities on the 3-dimensional accuracy of definitive casts. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:410-8. [CrossRef] google scholar
4. 4. Rungrojwittayakul O, Kan JY, Shiozaki K, Swamidass RS, Goodacre BJ, Goodacre CJ, Lozada JL. Accuracy of 3D printed models created by two Technologies of printers with different designs of model base. J Prosthodont 2020;29:124-8. [CrossRef] google scholar
5. 5. Patzelt SB, Lamprinos C, Stampf S, et al: The time efficiency of intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparative study. JADA 2014;145:542-51. [CrossRef] google scholar
6. 6. Revilla-Leon M, Özcan M. Additive manufacturing technologies used for processing polymers: current status and potential application in prosthetic dentistry. J Prosthodont 2019;28:146-58. [CrossRef] google scholar
7. 7. Infuehr R, Pucher N, Heller C, Lichtenegger H, Liska R, Schmidt V, Kuna L, Haase A, Stampfl J. Functional polymers by two-photon 3D lithography. Appl Surface Sci 2007;254:836-40. [CrossRef] google scholar
8. 8. Petrovic V, Gonzalez JVH, Ferrando OJ, Gordillo JD, Puchades JRB, Grinân LP. Additive layered manufacturing: sectors of industrial application shown through case studies. Int J Prod Res 2011;49:1061-79. [CrossRef] google scholar

9. 9. Brain M, Jimbo R, Wennenberg A. Production tolerance of additive manufactured polymeric objects for clinical applications. Dent Mater 2016;32:853-61. [CrossRef] google scholar
10. 10. Camardella LT, Vilella OV, Breuning H. Accuracy of printed dental models made with 2 prototype technologies and different designs of model bases. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017;151:1178-87. [CrossRef] google scholar
11. 11. Alharbi N, Wismeijer D, Osman RB. Additive manufacturing techniques in prosthodontics: where do we currently stand? a critical review. Int J Prosthodont 2017;30:474-84. [CrossRef] google scholar
12. 12. Jin SJ, Kim DY, Kim JH, Kim WC. Accuracy of Dental Replica Models Using Photopolymer Materials in Additive Manufacturing: In Vitro Three-Dimensional Evaluation. J Prosthodont 2019;28:557-62. [CrossRef] google scholar
13. 13. DIN Deutsches İnstitut für Normung. Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results Part 1: General principles and definitions (ISO 5725-1:1994). 1997; Berlin: Bouth Vorlag GmbH. google scholar
14. 14. Choi JW, Ahn JJ, Son K, Huh JB. Three-Dimensional Evaluation on Accuracy of Conventional and Milled Gypsum Models and 3D Printed Photopolymer Models. Materials 2019;12:3499. [CrossRef] google scholar
15. 15. Park ME, Shin SY. Three-dimensional comparative study on the accuracy and reproducibility of dental casts fabricated by 3D printers. J Prosthet Dent 2018;119:861:1-7. [CrossRef] google scholar
16. 16. Park JY, Kim HY, Kim JH, Kim JH, Kim WC. Comparison of prosthetic models produced by traditional and additive manufacturing methods. J Adv Prosthodont 2015;7:294-302. [CrossRef] google scholar
17. 17. Tinschert J, Natt G, Mautsch W, Spiekermann H, Anusavice KJ. Marginal fit of alumina- and zirconia-based fixed partial dentures produced by a CAD/CAM system. Oper Dent 2001;26:367-74. google scholar
18. 18. Boening KW, Wolf BH, Schmidt AE, Kastner K, Walter MH. Clinical fit of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:419-24. [CrossRef] google scholar
19. 19. Alharbi N, Osman RB, Wismeijer D. Factors influencing the dimensional accuracy of 3d-printed full-coverage dental restorations using stereolithography technology. Int J Prosthodont 2016;29:503-10. [CrossRef] google scholar
20. 20. Favero CS, English JD, Cozad BE, Wirthlin JO, Short MM, Kasper FK. Effect of print layer height and printer type on the accuracy of 3-dimensional printed orthodontic models. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2017;152:557-65. [CrossRef] google scholar
21. 21. Alharbi N, Osman R, Wismeijer D. Effect of build direction on the mechanical properties of 3D printed complete coverage interim dental restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:760-7. [CrossRef] google scholar
22. 22. Revilla-Leon M, Meyers MJ, Zandinejad A, Özcan M. A review on chemical composition, mechanical properties, and manufacturing work flow of additively manufactured current polymers for interim dental restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2019;31:51-7. [CrossRef] google scholar
23. 23. Hazeveld A, Huddleston Slater JJ, Ren Y. Accuracy and reproducibility of dental replica models reconstructed by different rapid prototyping techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;145:108-15. [CrossRef] google scholar
24. 24. Kim SY, Shin YS, Jung HD, Hwang CJ, Baik HS, Cha JY. Precision and trueness of dental models manufactured with different 3-dimensional printing techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2018;153:144-53. [CrossRef] google scholar
25. 25. Dietrich CA, Ender A, Baumgartner S, Mehl A. A validation study of reconstructed rapid prototyping models produced by two technologies. Angle Orthod 2017;87:782-7. [CrossRef] google scholar
26. 26.Rebong RE, Stewart KT, Utreja A, Ghoneima AA. Accuracy of three-dimensional dental resin models created by fused deposition modeling, stereolithography, and Polyjet prototype technologies: A comparative study. Angle Orthod 2018;88:363-9. [CrossRef ]