Assessment of different types of intra oral scanners and 3D printers on the accuracy of printed models: An in vitro study

Abstract

Background 3D printing technology is a reality in Dentistry and presents several ways to obtain a printed model. The aim of this study was to verify the influence of different types of intraoral scanners and 3D printers on the accuracy of printed models in comparison to plaster models obtained from conventional impressions. Material and Methods A dental study model was used as the reference model and was molded with polyvinyl siloxane to produce the plaster models. It was also scanned with two types of intraoral scanners and the digital files were printed by two types of 3D printers. The plaster and printed models formed five groups (n=50), which were analyzed using linear measurements at six dimension sites. In order to test the equivalence in the precision of the measurements made in the reference model and in the different models of the experimental groups, the Schuirmann Two-One Sided t-test was applied. The trueness of the measurements of the experimental models was tested in comparison to those of the reference model by applying tests for paired data. In all statistical tests, the significance level of 5% (α = 0.05) was adopted. Results In relation to precision, all five groups presented similar and acceptable results. The trueness analysis indicated that both the printed and the plaster models had average measurements that were different from the reference model. Conclusions It was concluded that the accuracy of printed and plaster models was impaired due to the trueness of the models. The type of printer influenced the accuracy of the printed models, while the type of scanner did not. The standardization of the method of obtaining printed models must be carried out in order to provide the production of quality models. However, there will be differences between the technologies. Key words: Dental models, three-dimensional printing, dimensional accuracy.

Quality assurance of 3D-printed patient specific anatomical models: a systematic review

“…All combinations found in the literature are listed. Combinations no publications could be assigned to are not shown Segmentation Error Printing Error Publications basic approach imaging setup tools for linear measurements time of dissection basic approach tools for linear measurements lin nosim cal lin cal [ 121 , 134 , 144 , 152 , 158 – 160 ] cad cal dis [ 153 , 161 – 166 ] cal nodis [ 15 , 70 , 71 , 167 ] 3Dcal nodis 3Dcal [ 168 ] pat DICOM [ 80 , 81 , 137 , 141 , 169 – 178 ] pat cal [ 95 , 146 , 154 , 155 , 179 – 190 ] pat other [ 129 , 142 , 171 , 191 – 194 ] surf <...…”

Accuracy of 3D Printed Model Acquired from Different Types of Intra Oral Scanners and 3D Printers

“…The findings of our study corroborated with the findings of Igai F et al . [ 1 ] and CH Im et al . [ 3 ] The findings could be attributed to the accuracy of 3D printers more than the scanners which can be affected by various causes, such as arch size (complete-arch or quadrant-arch), the 3D printing process, and measurement method.…”

“…All of these variables impact the accuracy of the models since they can add error to the process if not executed the proper way. [ 1 ]…”

An evaluation of concordance between linear measurements obtained from conventional, digital and reconstructed three-dimensional printed orthodontic models: An in vitro study

“…Though overall, there was a higher mean value for the reconstructed 3D model than conventional and digital models, both reconstructed and digital models were clinically acceptable in terms of accuracy and reproducibility. The higher mean values of the reconstructed 3D model might be attributed to the underlying factors governing the 3D printing technique [21][22][23]. The process of adding layer by layer during 3D printing will impact a product reconstructed.…”