Suppr超能文献

三维打印虚拟设置的评估。

Evaluation of three-dimensional printed virtual setups.

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, Universidad Tecnológica de México, Mexico City, Mexico.

Department of Orthodontics, Universidad Tecnológica de México, Mexico City, Mexico.

出版信息

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019 Feb;155(2):288-295. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.08.017.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Digital setups are reliable and show numerous benefits to the orthodontic practice. Fused deposition modeling can build physical replicas of these setup models. The purpose of this study was to compare 3-dimensional printed and conventional setups.

METHODS

Ten sets of pretreatment plaster models were randomly selected and scanned to obtain digital replicas. Conventional and virtual setups were constructed based on the treatment plan, anchorage needs, and extraction pattern. The same arch form was used for corresponding conventional and digital setups by replicating the archwire on the screen with the use of the 1:1 real scaling tool in the Orthoanalyzer software (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). Printed and manual setups were measured to compare dimensional accuracy and inter- and intra-arch characteristics. The differences were assessed by means of paired t test analyses.

RESULTS

The majority of measurements showed higher values on the manual setup models. Statistically significant differences were found in 6 dimensional-accuracy measurements (from -0.04 to 0.32 mm). One intra-arch (from 0.01 to 1.55 mm) and all inter-arch (from 0.87 to 0.95 mm) characteristics showed statistically significant differences. Maxillary models exhibited greater variations than mandibular setup models.

CONCLUSIONS

Three-dimensional setups printed with fused deposition modeling are not comparable to conventional setups. The digital setup process should be managed with care to avoid tooth collision and overcome software limitations.

摘要

简介

数字化模型具有可靠、高效等诸多优点,已经在正畸领域得到广泛应用。熔融沉积成型技术(Fused Deposition Modeling,FDM)可以根据这些模型制作物理模型。本研究旨在对比 3D 打印模型和传统模型。

方法

随机选择 10 副正畸治疗前的石膏模型进行扫描,以获得数字模型。根据治疗计划、支抗需要和拔牙模式,分别构建传统模型和虚拟模型。使用 Orthoanalyzer 软件(3Shape,哥本哈根,丹麦)中的 1:1 真实比例工具,将弓丝复制到屏幕上,复制相应的传统模型和数字模型。测量打印模型和手工模型的各项数据,比较两种模型的尺寸精度和牙弓特征。使用配对 t 检验分析数据。

结果

大多数手工模型的测量值更高。在 6 项尺寸精度测量(从-0.04 到 0.32 毫米)中发现了统计学差异。1 项牙弓内特征(从 0.01 到 1.55 毫米)和所有牙弓间特征(从 0.87 到 0.95 毫米)均存在统计学差异。上颌模型的变化比下颌模型更大。

结论

FDM 技术打印的 3D 模型与传统模型不具有可比性。应谨慎管理数字化模型制作流程,以避免牙体碰撞,并克服软件限制。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验