Khalil Ahmed S, Zaher Abbas R
Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Champollion St, P.O. Box: 21521, Alexandria, Egypt.
BMC Oral Health. 2025 Feb 14;25(1):238. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-05556-8.
Direct 3D-printed aligners served as a breakthrough era in clear aligner fabrication. Yet, there is a scarcity of studies evaluating their mechanical properties. The aim of this study was to compare direct 3D-printed aligners derived from different printing orientations (vertically, horizontally, 30, and 45 degrees) and thickness (0.5 and 0.7 mm) in terms of flexural strength.
This laboratory-based comparative study utilized 96 aligner flat specimens. They were designed, supported, and directly printed using shape memory resin, then randomly allocated into 8 groups. Group 1 (A, B, C, and D): 0.5 mm thickness printed vertically, horizontally, 30, and 45 degrees, respectively. Group 2 (A, B, C, and D): 0.7 mm thickness printed vertically, horizontally, 30, and 45 degrees, respectively. Each aligner specimen was placed on a custom-made bending jig, with the whole setup enclosed in a temperature-controlled water bath. Three-point bending test was performed using a universal testing machine, and the resulting force was recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using Student t-test for resin thickness comparison and one-way ANOVA with Tukey post-hoc test for comparison between printing orientations. Statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05.
No statistically significant differences were found between vertically, horizontally, 30, and 45 degrees printed aligner specimens. Aligner specimens of 0.7 mm thickness demonstrated significantly higher flexural strength values compared to those of 0.5 mm thickness.
Printing orientation did not alter the flexural strength of the direct 3D-printed aligner flat specimens, regardless of whether they were printed vertically, horizontally, or at angles of 30 or 45 degrees relative to the printer build plate. Additionally, specimens with a thickness of 0.7 mm exhibited higher bending resistance compared to those with a thickness of 0.5 mm.
直接3D打印矫治器开启了透明矫治器制造的突破性时代。然而,评估其力学性能的研究却很匮乏。本研究的目的是比较不同打印方向(垂直、水平、30度和45度)和厚度(0.5毫米和0.7毫米)的直接3D打印矫治器的抗弯强度。
本基于实验室的对比研究使用了96个矫治器扁平样本。它们采用形状记忆树脂进行设计、支撑并直接打印,然后随机分为8组。第1组(A、B、C和D):厚度为0.5毫米,分别垂直、水平、30度和45度打印。第2组(A、B、C和D):厚度为0.7毫米,分别垂直、水平、30度和45度打印。每个矫治器样本放置在定制的弯曲夹具上,整个装置置于温度可控的水浴中。使用万能试验机进行三点弯曲试验,并记录产生的力。使用学生t检验进行树脂厚度比较,使用单因素方差分析和Tukey事后检验进行打印方向之间的比较。统计学显著性设定为p≤0.05。
垂直、水平、30度和45度打印的矫治器样本之间未发现统计学显著差异。厚度为0.7毫米的矫治器样本的抗弯强度值明显高于厚度为0.5毫米的样本。
打印方向不会改变直接3D打印矫治器扁平样本的抗弯强度,无论它们是垂直、水平打印,还是相对于打印机构建板以30度或45度角打印。此外,厚度为0.7毫米的样本比厚度为0.5毫米的样本表现出更高的抗弯曲能力。