Cargando…
Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of 3D-Printed Anatomical Mandibular Models Using FFF, SLA, SLS, MJ, and BJ Printing Technology
With the rapid progression of additive manufacturing and the emergence of new 3D printing technologies, accuracy assessment is mostly being performed on isosymmetric-shaped test bodies. However, the accuracy of anatomic models can vary. The dimensional accuracy of root mean square values in terms of...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7141211/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32192099 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030817 |
_version_ | 1783519147147132928 |
---|---|
author | Msallem, Bilal Sharma, Neha Cao, Shuaishuai Halbeisen, Florian S. Zeilhofer, Hans-Florian Thieringer, Florian M. |
author_facet | Msallem, Bilal Sharma, Neha Cao, Shuaishuai Halbeisen, Florian S. Zeilhofer, Hans-Florian Thieringer, Florian M. |
author_sort | Msallem, Bilal |
collection | PubMed |
description | With the rapid progression of additive manufacturing and the emergence of new 3D printing technologies, accuracy assessment is mostly being performed on isosymmetric-shaped test bodies. However, the accuracy of anatomic models can vary. The dimensional accuracy of root mean square values in terms of trueness and precision of 50 mandibular replicas, printed with five common printing technologies, were evaluated. The highest trueness was found for the selective laser sintering printer (0.11 ± 0.016 mm), followed by a binder jetting printer (0.14 ± 0.02 mm), and a fused filament fabrication printer (0.16 ± 0.009 mm). However, highest precision was identified for the fused filament fabrication printer (0.05 ± 0.005 mm) whereas other printers had marginally lower values. Despite the statistically significance (p < 0.001), these differences can be considered clinically insignificant. These findings demonstrate that all 3D printing technologies create models with satisfactory dimensional accuracy for surgical use. Since satisfactory results in terms of accuracy can be reached with most technologies, the choice should be more strongly based on the printing materials, the intended use, and the overall budget. The simplest printing technology (fused filament fabrication) always scored high and thus is a reliable choice for most purposes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7141211 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71412112020-04-10 Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of 3D-Printed Anatomical Mandibular Models Using FFF, SLA, SLS, MJ, and BJ Printing Technology Msallem, Bilal Sharma, Neha Cao, Shuaishuai Halbeisen, Florian S. Zeilhofer, Hans-Florian Thieringer, Florian M. J Clin Med Article With the rapid progression of additive manufacturing and the emergence of new 3D printing technologies, accuracy assessment is mostly being performed on isosymmetric-shaped test bodies. However, the accuracy of anatomic models can vary. The dimensional accuracy of root mean square values in terms of trueness and precision of 50 mandibular replicas, printed with five common printing technologies, were evaluated. The highest trueness was found for the selective laser sintering printer (0.11 ± 0.016 mm), followed by a binder jetting printer (0.14 ± 0.02 mm), and a fused filament fabrication printer (0.16 ± 0.009 mm). However, highest precision was identified for the fused filament fabrication printer (0.05 ± 0.005 mm) whereas other printers had marginally lower values. Despite the statistically significance (p < 0.001), these differences can be considered clinically insignificant. These findings demonstrate that all 3D printing technologies create models with satisfactory dimensional accuracy for surgical use. Since satisfactory results in terms of accuracy can be reached with most technologies, the choice should be more strongly based on the printing materials, the intended use, and the overall budget. The simplest printing technology (fused filament fabrication) always scored high and thus is a reliable choice for most purposes. MDPI 2020-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7141211/ /pubmed/32192099 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030817 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Msallem, Bilal Sharma, Neha Cao, Shuaishuai Halbeisen, Florian S. Zeilhofer, Hans-Florian Thieringer, Florian M. Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of 3D-Printed Anatomical Mandibular Models Using FFF, SLA, SLS, MJ, and BJ Printing Technology |
title | Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of 3D-Printed Anatomical Mandibular Models Using FFF, SLA, SLS, MJ, and BJ Printing Technology |
title_full | Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of 3D-Printed Anatomical Mandibular Models Using FFF, SLA, SLS, MJ, and BJ Printing Technology |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of 3D-Printed Anatomical Mandibular Models Using FFF, SLA, SLS, MJ, and BJ Printing Technology |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of 3D-Printed Anatomical Mandibular Models Using FFF, SLA, SLS, MJ, and BJ Printing Technology |
title_short | Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of 3D-Printed Anatomical Mandibular Models Using FFF, SLA, SLS, MJ, and BJ Printing Technology |
title_sort | evaluation of the dimensional accuracy of 3d-printed anatomical mandibular models using fff, sla, sls, mj, and bj printing technology |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7141211/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32192099 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030817 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT msallembilal evaluationofthedimensionalaccuracyof3dprintedanatomicalmandibularmodelsusingfffslaslsmjandbjprintingtechnology AT sharmaneha evaluationofthedimensionalaccuracyof3dprintedanatomicalmandibularmodelsusingfffslaslsmjandbjprintingtechnology AT caoshuaishuai evaluationofthedimensionalaccuracyof3dprintedanatomicalmandibularmodelsusingfffslaslsmjandbjprintingtechnology AT halbeisenflorians evaluationofthedimensionalaccuracyof3dprintedanatomicalmandibularmodelsusingfffslaslsmjandbjprintingtechnology AT zeilhoferhansflorian evaluationofthedimensionalaccuracyof3dprintedanatomicalmandibularmodelsusingfffslaslsmjandbjprintingtechnology AT thieringerflorianm evaluationofthedimensionalaccuracyof3dprintedanatomicalmandibularmodelsusingfffslaslsmjandbjprintingtechnology |