Current and Emerging Applications of 3D Printing in Restorative Dentistry

Anadioti, Evanthia; Kane, Brittany; Soulas, Elizabeth M.

doi:10.1007/s40496-018-0181-3

Cited by 45 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additive manufacturing (AM), also known as 3-dimensional (3D) printing or rapid prototyping (RP), encompasses techniques that fabricate objects layer by layer. 3D printing, despite its relative recent introduction, has shown potential in many fields like engineering and medicine including dental medicine [ 17 ]. The available 3D printing systems for complete removable dental prostheses are FotoDenta denture (Dentamid, Germany) and Dentca 3D Printed Denture (Dentca, USA) [ 15 ].The limited resolution and reproducibility of the available printers along with their technical constraints have so far posed obstacles in such manufacturing methods of dental restorations [ 18 , 19 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D printed complete removable dental prostheses: a narrative review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The purpose of this paper is to review the available literature on three-dimensionally printed complete dentures in terms of novel biomaterials, fabrication techniques and workflow, clinical performance and patient satisfaction. Methods The methodology included applying a search strategy, defining inclusion and exclusion criteria, selecting studies and forming tables to summarize the results. Searches of PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases were performed independently by two reviewers to gather literature published between 2010 and 2020. Results A total of 126 titles were obtained from the electronic database, and the application of exclusion criteria resulted in the identification of 21 articles pertaining to printed technology for complete dentures. Current innovations and developments in digital dentistry have successfully led to the fabrication of removable dental prostheses using CAD/CAM technologies. Milled dentures have been studied more than 3D printed ones in the currently available literature. The limited number of clinical studies, mainly case reports, suggest current indications of 3D printing in denture fabrication process to be custom tray, record bases, trial, interim or immediate dentures but not definitive prostheses fabrication. Limitations include poor esthetics and retention, inability to balance occlusion and low printer resolution. Conclusions Initial studies on digital dentures have shown promising short-term clinical performance, positive patient-related results and reasonable cost-effectiveness. 3D printing has potential to modernize and streamline the denture fabrication techniques, materials and workflows. However, more research is required on the existing and developing materials and printers to allow for advancement and increase its application in removable prosthodontics.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D printed complete removable dental prostheses: a narrative review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is wastage regarding milling burs and restorative materials, and producing complex shapes is difficult [ 14 , 15 , 16 ]. In addition to this subtractive technique, additive-manufacturing techniques (3D printing and rapid prototyping) have been widely introduced, which fabricate restorations with exceptional mechanical properties and esthetics [ 17 , 18 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface Properties of Polymer Resins Fabricated with Subtractive and Additive Manufacturing Techniques

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to compare the surface roughness, hardness, and flexure strength of interim indirect resin restorations fabricated with CAD-CAM (CC), 3D printing (3D), and conventional techniques (CV). Twenty disk (3 mm × Ø10 mm) and ten bar specimens (25 × 2 × 2 mm) were fabricated for the CC, 3D, and CV groups, to be used for surface roughness, micro-hardness, and flexural strength testing using standardized protocol. Three indentations for Vickers micro-hardness (VHN) were performed on each disk and an average was identified for each specimen. Surface micro-roughness (Ra) was calculated in micrometers (μm) using a 3D optical non-contact surface microscope. A three-point bending test with a universal testing machine was utilized for assessing flexural strength. The load was applied at a crosshead speed of 3 mm/min over a distance of 25 mm until fracture. Means and standard deviations were compared using ANOVA and post hoc Tukey–Kramer tests, and a p-value of ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Ra was significantly different among the study groups (p < 0.05). Surface roughness among the CC and CV groups was statistically comparable (p > 0.05). However, 3D showed significantly higher Ra compared to CC and CV samples (p < 0.05). Micro-hardness was significantly higher in 3D samples (p < 0.05) compared to CC and CV specimens. In addition, CC and CV showed comparable micro-hardness (p > 0.05). A significant difference in flexural strength was observed among the study groups (p < 0.05). CC and 3D showed comparable strength outcomes (p > 0.05), although CV specimens showed significantly lower (p < 0.05) strength compared to CC and 3D samples. The 3D-printed provisional restorative resins showed flexural strength and micro-hardness comparable to CAD-CAM fabricated specimens, and surface micro-roughness for printed specimens was considerably higher compared to CAD-CAM and conventional fabrication techniques.

show abstract

“…27 Current indications for 3D printing in dentistry are constantly expanding and include but are not limited to study models, surgical guides, occlusal splints, custom trays, record bases, castable patterns, interim fixed or removable prosthe-sis, and aligners. 6,28,29 An increasing number of studies indicate that 3D-printed study models are considered clinically acceptable. 17,[30][31][32][33] Similarly, studies on 3D-printed interim prostheses indicate that they could be just as accurate as milled ones.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From the other side and in contrast to milling, a more recently introduced manufacturing technology in dentistry is three-dimensional printing (3DP). 6 Also referred to as additive manufacturing (AM) and rapid prototyping (RP), 3DP describes a number of related technologies that build objects layer by layer directly from a 3D CAD model. 7 With 3DP, a dental prosthesis can be produced with undercuts, voids, intricate internal geometrical details, and anatomical landmarks.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of Dental and Industrial 3D Printers

Anadioti

Kane

Bergler

et al. 2022

Journal of Prosthodontics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This in vitro study evaluated the dimensional accuracy of three 3D printers and one milling machine with their respective polymeric materials using a simplified geometrical model. Materials and methods:A simplified computer-aided design (CAD) model was created. The test samples were fabricated with three 3D printers: a dental desktop stereolithography (SLA) printer, an industrial SLA printer, and an industrial fused deposition modeling (FDM) printer, as well as a 5-axis milling machine. One polymer material was used per industrial printer and milling machine while two materials were used with the dental printer for a total of five study groups. Test specimens were then digitized using a laboratory scanner. The virtual outer caliper method was used to measure the linear dimensions of the digitized 3D printed and milled specimens in x-, y-, and z-axes, and compare them to the known values of the CAD model. Data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis one-way ANOVA on Ranks followed by the Tukey's test. Results: Milled specimens were not significantly different from the CAD model in any dimension (p > 0.05). All 3D printed specimens were significantly different from the CAD model in all dimensions (p = 0.01), except the dental SLA 3D printer with one of the polymers tested (Bis-GMA) which was not significantly different in two (x and z) dimensions (p = 0.4 and p = 0.12). Conclusions: The milling technology tested provided greater dimensional accuracy than the selected 3D printing. Printer, printing technology, and material selection affected the accuracy of the printed model.

show abstract

Current and Emerging Applications of 3D Printing in Restorative Dentistry

Cited by 45 publications

References 58 publications

3D printed complete removable dental prostheses: a narrative review

3D printed complete removable dental prostheses: a narrative review

Surface Properties of Polymer Resins Fabricated with Subtractive and Additive Manufacturing Techniques

Accuracy of Dental and Industrial 3D Printers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About