Background: The study's objective was to assess the accuracy (trueness and precision) of orthodontic models obtained from crowded and spaced dentition finalized for the production of clear aligners. Four 3D printers featuring different technologies and market segments were used for this purpose. Methods: Two digital master models were obtained from two patients featuring respectively crowded dentition (CM group) and diastema/edentulous spaces (DEM group). The 3D printers tested were: Form 3B (SLA technology, medium-professional segment), Vector 3SP (SLA technology, industrial segment), Asiga Pro 4K65 (DLP technology, high-professional segment), and Anycubic Photon M3 (LCD technology, entry-level segment). Each 3D printed model was scanned and superimposed onto the reference master model and digital deviation analysis was performed to assess the trueness and precision calculated as root mean square (RMS). All data were statistically examined to obtain intra-group and inter-groups comparisons(p 0.05). Results: In both CM and DEM groups, SLA 3D printers (Vector 3SP and Form 3B) showed lower trueness error compared to DLP/LCD technologies (Asiga Pro 4K65, Anycubic Photon M3) (p < 0.001). In general, the entry-level printer (Anycubic Photon M3) showed the greatest trueness error (p < 0.001). Comparing CM and DEM models generated with the same 3D printer, statistically significant differences were found only for Asiga Pro 4k65 and Anycubic Photon M3 printers (p > 0.05). Concerning data of precision, the DLP technology (Asiga Pro 4k65) showed lower error compared to the other 3D printers tested. The trueness and precision errors were within the accepted clinical error for clear aligner manufacturing (< 0.25 mm), with the entry-level 3D printer nearly reaching this value. Conclusions: The accuracy of orthodontic models generated for clear aligners can be affected by different 3D printer technologies and anatomical characteristics of dental arches.

Accuracy (trueness and precision) of 3D printed orthodontic models finalized to clear aligners production, testing crowded and spaced dentition

Ronsivalle V.
Secondo
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
;
Isola G.
Formal Analysis
;
Leonardi R.
Penultimo
Supervision
;
Lo Giudice A.
Ultimo
Writing – Review & Editing
2023-01-01

Abstract

Background: The study's objective was to assess the accuracy (trueness and precision) of orthodontic models obtained from crowded and spaced dentition finalized for the production of clear aligners. Four 3D printers featuring different technologies and market segments were used for this purpose. Methods: Two digital master models were obtained from two patients featuring respectively crowded dentition (CM group) and diastema/edentulous spaces (DEM group). The 3D printers tested were: Form 3B (SLA technology, medium-professional segment), Vector 3SP (SLA technology, industrial segment), Asiga Pro 4K65 (DLP technology, high-professional segment), and Anycubic Photon M3 (LCD technology, entry-level segment). Each 3D printed model was scanned and superimposed onto the reference master model and digital deviation analysis was performed to assess the trueness and precision calculated as root mean square (RMS). All data were statistically examined to obtain intra-group and inter-groups comparisons(p 0.05). Results: In both CM and DEM groups, SLA 3D printers (Vector 3SP and Form 3B) showed lower trueness error compared to DLP/LCD technologies (Asiga Pro 4K65, Anycubic Photon M3) (p < 0.001). In general, the entry-level printer (Anycubic Photon M3) showed the greatest trueness error (p < 0.001). Comparing CM and DEM models generated with the same 3D printer, statistically significant differences were found only for Asiga Pro 4k65 and Anycubic Photon M3 printers (p > 0.05). Concerning data of precision, the DLP technology (Asiga Pro 4k65) showed lower error compared to the other 3D printers tested. The trueness and precision errors were within the accepted clinical error for clear aligner manufacturing (< 0.25 mm), with the entry-level 3D printer nearly reaching this value. Conclusions: The accuracy of orthodontic models generated for clear aligners can be affected by different 3D printer technologies and anatomical characteristics of dental arches.
2023
3D printing
Clear aligners
Digital orthodontics
Orthodontics
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Grassia et al BMC Oral Health 2023.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.75 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.75 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11769/567272
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 6
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 7
social impact