posterpresentation
Description

Title: 2538 - Accuracy of 3D Printed vs. Conventional Cast Models in Dentistry -

Authors:

Daniel Salem (Presenter)
Tufts University School of Dental Medicine

Jeff Daddona, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine
Roberta Afutu, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine
Mark Lorich, Evolution Dental Science, LLC
Kathryn Dunn, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine
Tao Xu, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine
Shruti Jain, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine
Duong Tran, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine
Gerard Kugel, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine

Abstract:

Objectives: The use of 3D printing technology to prepare dental models has emerged as a new method in dental practice and research. The technique provides the benefit of a digital file for unlimited replication and electronic communication. This study compared the dimensional accuracy of the 3D printing method with the conventional impression method on

Methods: Upper and lower arches of nine typodonts (Kilgore®) were scanned with a 3Shape TRIOS® scanner to obtain a baseline digital file of each arch. The digital file of each arch was printed via a MoonRay® S 3D printer, DLP printer commonly used in dentistry, with SprintRay® resin. Impressions were taken with the same nine typodonts conventionally via Jeltrate Plus® Fast Set (Dentsply Sirona) alginate and Die-Keen® plaster (Modern Materials). Three trials of the same procedure yielded 54 Printed and 54 conventional models. All models were scanned to obtain digital representation. GeoMagic Control® 2015 software was used to superimpose the files of fabricated models with their respective baseline files. The root mean square (RMS) square was calculated by analyzing the average surface deviation between 3D printed and conventional models with their respective baseline files. Measures for the 3 repeated samples in each group were averaged, generating a sample size of 18 in each group (N=18). Student’s paired t-test and Wilcoxon Signed Rank tests were conducted for significance

Results: There was a statistically significant difference (p=0.0007) in the mean RMS difference of the 3D print (149.98 ± 19.74µm) and the conventional group (177.36 ± 25.76µm) with the 3D print group having a mean RMS difference 27.37µm less than the conventional group.

Conclusions: This study showed that 3D printing models with the MoonRay S 3D printer has higher RMS dimensional accuracy than conventional fabrication.

Student Presenter

Disclosure Statement:
The submitter must disclose the names of the organizations with which any author have a relationship, the nature of the relationship, and the clinical or research area involved. The following is submitted: NONE

Tags