Comparison of dimensional accuracy between direct-printed and thermoformed aligners

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q1 Dentistry Korean Journal of Orthodontics Pub Date : 2022-04-22 DOI:10.4041/kjod21.269
Nickolas Koenig, Jin-Young Choi, Julie F. McCray, Andrew Hayes, P. Schneider, Ki Beom Kim
{"title":"Comparison of dimensional accuracy between direct-printed and thermoformed aligners","authors":"Nickolas Koenig, Jin-Young Choi, Julie F. McCray, Andrew Hayes, P. Schneider, Ki Beom Kim","doi":"10.4041/kjod21.269","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the dimensional accuracy between thermoformed and direct-printed aligners. Methods Three types of aligners were manufactured from the same reference standard tessellation language (STL) file thermoformed aligners were manufactured using Zendura FLXTM (n = 12) and Essix ACETM (n = 12), and direct-printed aligners were printed using Tera HarzTM TC-85DAP 3D Printer UV Resin (n = 12). The teeth were not manipulated with any tooth-moving software in this study. The samples were sprayed with an opaque scanning spray, scanned, imported to Geomagic® Control XTM metrology software, and superimposed on the reference STL file by using the best-fit alignment algorithm. Distances between the aligner meshes and the reference STL file were measured at nine anatomical landmarks. Results Mean absolute discrepancies in the Zendura FLXTM aligners ranged from 0.076 ± 0.057 mm to 0.260 ± 0.089 mm and those in the Essix ACETM aligners ranged from 0.188 ± 0.271 mm to 0.457 ± 0.350 mm, while in the direct-printed aligners, they ranged from 0.079 ± 0.054 mm to 0.224 ± 0.041 mm. Root mean square values, representing the overall trueness, ranged from 0.209 ± 0.094 mm for Essix ACETM, 0.188 ± 0.074 mm for Zendura FLXTM, and 0.140 ± 0.020 mm for the direct-printed aligners. Conclusions This study showed greater trueness and precision of direct-printed aligners than thermoformed aligners.","PeriodicalId":49934,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Orthodontics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod21.269","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the dimensional accuracy between thermoformed and direct-printed aligners. Methods Three types of aligners were manufactured from the same reference standard tessellation language (STL) file thermoformed aligners were manufactured using Zendura FLXTM (n = 12) and Essix ACETM (n = 12), and direct-printed aligners were printed using Tera HarzTM TC-85DAP 3D Printer UV Resin (n = 12). The teeth were not manipulated with any tooth-moving software in this study. The samples were sprayed with an opaque scanning spray, scanned, imported to Geomagic® Control XTM metrology software, and superimposed on the reference STL file by using the best-fit alignment algorithm. Distances between the aligner meshes and the reference STL file were measured at nine anatomical landmarks. Results Mean absolute discrepancies in the Zendura FLXTM aligners ranged from 0.076 ± 0.057 mm to 0.260 ± 0.089 mm and those in the Essix ACETM aligners ranged from 0.188 ± 0.271 mm to 0.457 ± 0.350 mm, while in the direct-printed aligners, they ranged from 0.079 ± 0.054 mm to 0.224 ± 0.041 mm. Root mean square values, representing the overall trueness, ranged from 0.209 ± 0.094 mm for Essix ACETM, 0.188 ± 0.074 mm for Zendura FLXTM, and 0.140 ± 0.020 mm for the direct-printed aligners. Conclusions This study showed greater trueness and precision of direct-printed aligners than thermoformed aligners.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
直接印刷和热成型对准器尺寸精度的比较
目的评价和比较热成型矫形器和直接打印矫形器的尺寸精度。方法采用Zendura FLXTM (n = 12)和Essix ACETM (n = 12)分别制备三种不同类型的牙对准器,采用Tera HarzTM TC-85DAP 3D打印机UV树脂(n = 12)直接打印牙对准器。在这项研究中,牙齿没有使用任何移动牙齿的软件进行操作。样品用不透明扫描喷雾喷射,扫描后导入Geomagic®Control XTM计量软件,使用最佳拟合比对算法叠加在参考STL文件上。在9个解剖标志处测量校准器网格与参考STL文件之间的距离。结果Zendura FLXTM矫形器的平均绝对误差范围为0.076±0.057 mm ~ 0.260±0.089 mm, Essix ACETM矫形器的平均绝对误差范围为0.188±0.271 mm ~ 0.457±0.350 mm,直印矫形器的平均绝对误差范围为0.079±0.054 mm ~ 0.224±0.041 mm。代表整体正确率的均方根值为:Essix ACETM为0.209±0.094 mm, Zendura FLXTM为0.188±0.074 mm,直印矫正器为0.140±0.020 mm。结论直接打印矫形器比热成型矫形器具有更高的准确性和准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Korean Journal of Orthodontics
Korean Journal of Orthodontics Dentistry-Orthodontics
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
48
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Korean Journal of Orthodontics (KJO) is an international, open access, peer reviewed journal published in January, March, May, July, September, and November each year. It was first launched in 1970 and, as the official scientific publication of Korean Association of Orthodontists, KJO aims to publish high quality clinical and scientific original research papers in all areas related to orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. Specifically, its interest focuses on evidence-based investigations of contemporary diagnostic procedures and treatment techniques, expanding to significant clinical reports of diverse treatment approaches. The scope of KJO covers all areas of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics including successful diagnostic procedures and treatment planning, growth and development of the face and its clinical implications, appliance designs, biomechanics, TMJ disorders and adult treatment. Specifically, its latest interest focuses on skeletal anchorage devices, orthodontic appliance and biomaterials, 3 dimensional imaging techniques utilized for dentofacial diagnosis and treatment planning, and orthognathic surgery to correct skeletal disharmony in association of orthodontic treatment.
期刊最新文献
Clinical expression of programmed maxillary buccal expansion and buccolingual crown inclination with Invisalign EX30 and SmartTrack aligners and the effect of 1-week vs. 2-week aligner change regimes: A retrospective cohort study. Orthodontic treatment in a patient with Moebius syndrome: A case report. Clinical effects of different prescriptions on the inclination of maxillary and mandibular incisors by using passive self-ligating brackets. Enhancement of bioactivity and osseointegration in Ti-6Al-4V orthodontic mini-screws coated with calcium phosphate on the TiO2 nanotube layer. Crown-root angulations of the maxillary anterior teeth according to malocclusions: A cone-beam computed tomography study in Korean population.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1