Suppr超能文献

采用不同技术制作的三维打印模型的准确性和表面特征。

Trueness and surface characteristics of 3-dimensional printed casts made with different technologies.

作者信息

Young Kim Ryan Jin, Cho Su-Min, Jung Woo-Sun, Park Ji-Man

机构信息

Associate Professor, Department of Dental Science, Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University School of Dentistry, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Postdoctoral Fellow, Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University School of Dentistry, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

J Prosthet Dent. 2024 Dec;132(6):1324.e1-1324.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.12.002. Epub 2023 Jan 10.

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Three-dimensional (3D) printers should be capable of fabricating products with high accuracy for potential use in a wide range of dental applications. The trueness and surface characteristics of 3D-printed casts made with different technologies remain unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the trueness and surface characteristics of 4 types of dental casts printed using 6 different 3D printers.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Four dental casts prepared for intracoronal and extracoronal restorations were printed using 6 different 3D printers-2 printers of each printing technology (FDM: Creator, Lugo; DLP: D2, ND5100; SLA: Form 2, Form 3). The printed casts were scanned to obtain standard tessellation language (STL) data sets that were superimposed onto the reference to evaluate their trueness (n=15). Trueness was measured based on overall deviations for each cast and for sectional deviations within the cavities. For qualitative evaluation, the surface characteristics of the 3D-printed casts were analyzed by using a digital camera, stereomicroscope, and scanning electron microscope. Statistical analyses were conducted using the Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by multiple Mann-Whitney U tests for pairwise comparisons among groups (α=.05).

RESULTS

The overall median trueness values were lowest with the Form 3 (27.9 μm), followed by the ND5100 (30.0 μm), Lugo (37.1 μm), D2 (41.4 μm), Form 2 (46.9 μm), and Creator (83.3 μm) (P<.05). Sectional deviations within the cavity were generally greater than overall deviation. Macroscopic and microscopic images showed that the reproduced casts had the smoothest surface with the SLA, followed by the DLP and FDM printers. Horizontal layers were more discernible with the FDM printer.

CONCLUSIONS

The trueness of the 3D-printed casts was influenced by the type of tooth preparation and was printer dependent. Among the tested 3D printers, the Form 3 produced the most accurate casts, while the Creator produced the least accurate casts.

摘要

问题陈述

三维(3D)打印机应能够高精度制造产品,以便在广泛的牙科应用中潜在使用。采用不同技术制作的3D打印模型的精度和表面特征仍不明确。

目的

本体外研究的目的是评估使用6种不同3D打印机打印的4种类型牙科模型的精度和表面特征。

材料与方法

使用6种不同的3D打印机——每种打印技术各2台打印机(熔融沉积成型:Creator、Lugo;数字光处理:D2、ND5100;立体光刻:Form 2、Form 3)打印4个用于冠内和冠外修复的牙科模型。对打印的模型进行扫描以获得标准镶嵌语言(STL)数据集,将其与参考模型叠加以评估其精度(n = 15)。基于每个模型的总体偏差和腔内的截面偏差来测量精度。为进行定性评估,使用数码相机、立体显微镜和扫描电子显微镜分析3D打印模型的表面特征。采用Kruskal-Wallis检验进行统计分析,随后进行多组Mann-Whitney U检验以进行组间两两比较(α = 0.05)。

结果

总体中位数精度值最低的是Form 3(27.9μm),其次是ND5100(30.0μm)、Lugo(37.1μm)、D2(41.4μm)、Form 2(46.9μm)和Creator(83.3μm)(P < 0.05)。腔内的截面偏差通常大于总体偏差。宏观和微观图像显示,立体光刻打印的模型表面最光滑,其次是数字光处理打印机和熔融沉积成型打印机。熔融沉积成型打印机的水平层更明显。

结论

3D打印模型的精度受牙齿预备类型影响且取决于打印机。在测试的3D打印机中,Form 3打印的模型最精确,而Creator打印的模型最不精确。

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