Comparison of different 3D printers in terms of dimensional stability by image data of a dry human mandible obtained from CBCT and CT.

Abstract

Objectives: To manage the mandibular traumas, for the expression of the complex anatomy or pathology in education of health sciences related branches, a model of the traumatized mandible is indispensable. For these, different 3D-print-technologies can be used. The aim of this study is, to measure how close these 3D-printed-models are to human-mandible (trueness) and the effectiveness of CT and CBCT at this point.

Study design: One-dry-human-mandible and 10-models manufactured by five different 3D-printers in four different-kinds of additive-manufacturing technology (Fused-Deposition-Modeling (FDM), Stereolithography (SLA), Binder-jetting (BJ), Polyjet (PJ)) were used, five-anatomic-landmarks and eight-distances were measured and evaluated. Mandible's data were constructed based on DICOM-3.0 data from CBCT and CT scans. Images were opened in MIMICS (software-program).

Results: Study compared the devices that produced models with the same dry human-mandible. It was seen that the model with the highest margin of error (132.5 mm) was manufactured by Fused-deposition-modeling device using CT-data. In terms of distance to real-data, the model with the lowest error was generated by Binder-Jetting (ZCorp) with CBCT-data. Models produced with CBCT-data are closer to dry-human-mandible than models with CT-data.

Conclusion: The current study shows that CBCT generates significantly better data than CT in producing mandibular models. The first choice for manufacturing of human mandible is BJ and the second choice is the technology of SLA.