PhD student, Department of Prosthodontics, Institute of Odontology, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
PhD student, Biomedical Engineering Institute, Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas, Lithuania.
J Dent. 2024 Sep;148:105044. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105044. Epub 2024 May 4.
To compare the trueness of maxillomandibular relationship between articulated 3D-printed and conventional diagnostic casts in maximum intercuspation (MIP).
Reference casts were articulated in MIP, and scanned using a Coordinate Measurement Machine (CMM, n = 1). Digital scans were made from the reference casts by using an intraoral scanner (IOS, n = 10) (Trios 4; 3Shape A/S). IOS scans were processed to create 3D-printed casts by using MAX UV385 (Asiga) and NextDent 5100 (3DSystems) 3D-printers. The conventional workflow implemented vinylpolysiloxane (VPS) impressions and Type IV stone. Stone and 3D-printed casts were articulated and digitized with a laboratory scanner (E4; 3Shape A/S). The 3D-printed casts were scanned on two occasions: with and without positioning pins. Inter-arch distances and 3D-contact area were measured and compared. Statistical tests used were Shapiro-Wilk, Levene's, Welch's t-test, and 2-way ANOVA (α=0.05).
IOS group showed similar or better maxillomandibular relationship trueness than stone casts and 3D-printed casts (p < 0.05). 3D-contact area analysis showed similar deviations between 3D-printed and stone casts (p > 0.05). The choice of 3D-printer and presence of positioning pins on the casts significantly influenced maxillomandibular relationship trueness (p < 0.05).
Articulated 3D-printed and stone casts exhibited similar maxillomandibular relationship trueness.
Although 3D-printing methods can introduce a considerable amount of deviations, the maxillomandibular relationship trueness of articulated 3D-printed and stone casts in MIP can be considered similar.
比较最大牙尖交错位(MIP)中,颌位关系的 3D 打印模型与传统诊断模型的准确性。
参考模型在 MIP 中进行颌位记录,使用三坐标测量机(CMM)扫描(n=1)。使用口内扫描仪(IOS)(Trios 4;3Shape A/S)对参考模型进行数字扫描(n=10)。通过使用 ASIGA 的 MAX UV385 和 3DSystems 的 NextDent 5100 3D 打印机,对 IOS 扫描进行处理以创建 3D 打印模型。采用聚硅氧烷(VPS)印模和 IV 型石膏进行传统工作流程。使用实验室扫描仪(E4;3Shape A/S)对石膏模型和 3D 打印模型进行颌位记录和数字化。3D 打印模型分两次扫描:有和没有定位销。测量并比较颌间距离和 3D 接触面积。使用 Shapiro-Wilk、Levene's、Welch t 检验和双因素方差分析(α=0.05)进行统计检验。
与石模型和 3D 打印模型相比,IOS 组的颌位关系准确性相似或更好(p<0.05)。3D 接触面积分析显示,3D 打印模型和石模型之间的偏差相似(p>0.05)。3D 打印机的选择和模型上定位销的存在显著影响颌位关系准确性(p<0.05)。
可活动颌位关系的 3D 打印模型和石模型具有相似的颌位关系准确性。
尽管 3D 打印方法可能会引入大量偏差,但在 MIP 中,可活动颌位关系的 3D 打印模型和石模型的准确性可以认为是相似的。