Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Center for Dental Medicine, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Center for Dental Medicine, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2024 Apr;152:106418. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2024.106418. Epub 2024 Jan 24.
Different printing technologies can be used for prosthetically oriented implant placement, however the influence of different printing orientations and steam sterilization remains unclear. In particular, no data is available for the novel technology Continuous Liquid Interface Production. The objective was to evaluate the dimensional accuracy of surgical guides manufactured with different printing techniques in vertical and horizontal printing orientation before and after steam sterilization. A total of 80 surgical guides were manufactured by means of continuous liquid interface production (CLIP; material: Keyguide, Keyprint), digital light processing (DLP; material: Luxaprint Ortho, DMG), stereolithography (SLA; Surgical guide, Formlabs), and fused filament fabrication (FFF; material: Clear Base Support, Arfona) in vertical and horizontal printing orientation (n = 10 per subgroup). Spheres were included in the design to determine the coordinates of 17 reference points. Each specimen was digitized with a laboratory scanner after additive manufacturing (AM) and after steam sterilization (134 °C). To determine the accuracy, root mean square values (RMS) were calculated and coordinates of the reference points were recorded. Based on the measured coordinates, deviations of the reference points and relevant distances were calculated. Paired t-tests and one-way ANOVA were applied for statistical analysis (significance p < 0.05). After AM, all printing technologies showed comparable high accuracy, with an increased deviation in z-axis when printed horizontally. After sterilization, FFF printed surgical guides showed distinct warpage. The other subgroups showed no significant differences regarding the RMS of the corpus after steam sterilization (p > 0.05). Regarding reference points and distances, CLIP showed larger deviations compared to SLA in both printing orientations after steam sterilization, while DLP manufactured guides were the most dimensionally stable. In conclusion, the different printing technologies and orientations had little effect on the manufacturing accuracy of the surgical guides before sterilization. However, after sterilization, FFF surgical guides exhibited significant deformation making their clinical use impossible. CLIP showed larger deformations due to steam sterilization than the other photopolymerizing techniques, however, discrepancies may be considered within the range of clinical acceptance. The influence on the implant position remains to be evaluated.
不同的打印技术可用于假体导向植入物的定位,但不同打印方向和蒸汽灭菌对其的影响尚不清楚。特别是对于新型连续液界生产技术,目前尚无数据。本研究的目的是评估不同打印技术制造的手术导板在垂直和水平打印方向上的尺寸精度,以及在蒸汽灭菌前后的精度变化。共使用连续液界生产(CLIP;材料:Keyguide,Keyprint)、数字光处理(DLP;材料:Luxaprint Ortho,DMG)、立体光刻(SLA;Surgical guide,Formlabs)和熔融沉积成型(FFF;材料:Clear Base Support,Arfona)在垂直和水平打印方向(每组 10 个样本)制造了 80 个手术导板。设计中包含球体以确定 17 个参考点的坐标。每个样本在增材制造(AM)后和蒸汽灭菌(134°C)后使用实验室扫描仪进行数字化。为了确定精度,计算了均方根值(RMS)并记录了参考点的坐标。基于测量的坐标,计算了参考点和相关距离的偏差。应用配对 t 检验和单因素方差分析进行统计学分析(显著性 p < 0.05)。AM 后,所有打印技术的精度都非常高,水平打印时 z 轴的偏差增加。灭菌后,FFF 打印的手术导板明显变形。其他亚组在蒸汽灭菌后,本体的 RMS 没有显著差异(p > 0.05)。关于参考点和距离,CLIP 在蒸汽灭菌后两种打印方向的偏差均大于 SLA,而 DLP 制造的导板尺寸稳定性最好。总之,在灭菌前,不同的打印技术和方向对手术导板的制造精度影响不大。然而,在灭菌后,FFF 手术导板发生了显著的变形,使其无法临床使用。CLIP 由于蒸汽灭菌而发生的变形大于其他光聚合技术,但差异可能在临床可接受的范围内。对植入物位置的影响仍有待评估。