Department of Orthodontics, The Institute of Craniofacial Deformity, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea; Institute for Innovation in Digital Healthcare, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea.
Department of Orthodontics, The Institute of Craniofacial Deformity, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2024 Dec;166(6):595-607. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2024.08.005. Epub 2024 Oct 10.
We assessed the accuracy and fit of 3-dimensional (3D)-printed indirect bonding (IDB) trays fabricated using various photopolymer resin materials.
A maxillary plaster model and 60 plaster replicas were created. IDB trays with arbitrary bracket configurations were 3D-printed using 3 hard resins (Amber [AB], TC85DAC [TC], Orthoflex [OF]) and 3 soft resins (IBT [IT], IDB2 [ID], and MED625FLX [MD]). A reference plaster model with a computer-aided design-designed IDB tray attached with nonfunctional, arbitrary bracket configurations on the buccal surface serving as reference points for measurement was superimposed on scanned plaster replicas holding 3D-printed trays to assess transfer accuracy and clinically acceptable error. Printing accuracy was assessed by comparing computer-aided design trays to printed trays, and tray fit was measured by the gap volume between the tray and plaster replica using a Fit-Checker (GC Corp, Tokyo, Japan).
Six tray groups showed significant linear transfer errors, particularly in the vertical direction (0.15 mm [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.10-1.15]; P = 0.004). The OF group exhibited the largest vertical error (0.27 mm [95% CI, 0.19-0.35]), whereas the ID group had the smallest (0.10 mm [95% CI, 0.06-0.14]). Angular errors did not exhibit significant differences across the groups. Linear precision error was the highest in OF, followed by ID, TC, and MD, then AB and IT (P <0.001). Of all tray groups, 90.1% and 68.8% met the clinically acceptable linear (<0.25 mm) and angular errors (1°).
Linear errors, particularly vertical errors, are more material-dependent than angular errors. Gap volume alone was not a reliable predictor of IDB tray accuracy. Therefore, material-specific designs are needed to control the optimal fit and facilitate precise bracket placement.
我们评估了使用各种光聚合树脂材料制造的 3 维(3D)打印间接粘接(IDB)托盘的准确性和适配性。
创建了一个上颌石膏模型和 60 个石膏复制品。使用 3 种硬树脂(琥珀色[AB]、TC85DAC[TC]、Orthoflex[OF])和 3 种软树脂(IBT[IT]、IDB2[ID]和 MED625FLX[MD])3D 打印具有任意托槽构型的 IDB 托盘。一个带有计算机辅助设计(CAD)设计的 IDB 托盘的参考石膏模型附着在颊面的非功能性、任意托槽构型上,作为测量的参考点,与扫描的石膏复制品重叠,以评估转移准确性和临床可接受的误差。打印准确性通过比较 CAD 托盘和打印托盘来评估,托盘适配性通过 Fit-Checker(GC 公司,东京,日本)测量托盘和石膏复制品之间的间隙体积来评估。
6 个托盘组显示出显著的线性转移误差,特别是在垂直方向(0.15 毫米[95%置信区间{CI},0.10-1.15];P=0.004)。OF 组显示出最大的垂直误差(0.27 毫米[95%CI,0.19-0.35]),而 ID 组最小(0.10 毫米[95%CI,0.06-0.14])。各组之间的角度误差没有显著差异。OF 的线性精度误差最高,其次是 ID、TC 和 MD,然后是 AB 和 IT(P<0.001)。在所有托盘组中,90.1%和 68.8%符合临床可接受的线性(<0.25 毫米)和角度误差(1°)。
线性误差,特别是垂直误差,比角度误差更依赖于材料。间隙体积本身不是 IDB 托盘准确性的可靠预测指标。因此,需要特定于材料的设计来控制最佳适配性并促进精确的托槽放置。