Influence of additive manufacturing method and build angle on the accuracy of 3D-printed palatal plates

Jingtao Dai; Ping Li; Sebastian Spintzyk; Chufeng Liu; Shulan Xu

doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104449

Influence of additive manufacturing method and build angle on the accuracy of 3D-printed palatal plates

J Dent. 2023 May:132:104449. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104449. Epub 2023 Feb 10.

Authors

Jingtao Dai¹, Ping Li², Sebastian Spintzyk³, Chufeng Liu⁴, Shulan Xu⁵

Affiliations

¹ Department of Orthodontics, Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Southern Medical University, South Jiangnan Road No. 366, Guangzhou 510280, China.
² Center of Oral Implantology, Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Southern Medical University, South Jiangnan Road No. 366, Guangzhou 510280, China.
³ ADMiRE Reseach Center - Additive Manufacturing, intelligent Robotics, Sensors and Engineering, School of Engineering and IT, Carinthia University of Applied Sciences, Europastraße 4, Villach 9524, Austria.
⁴ Department of Orthodontics, Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Southern Medical University, South Jiangnan Road No. 366, Guangzhou 510280, China. Electronic address: xyzmmok@smu.edu.cn.
⁵ Center of Oral Implantology, Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Southern Medical University, South Jiangnan Road No. 366, Guangzhou 510280, China. Electronic address: xushulan_672588@smu.edu.cn.

PMID: 36773740
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104449

Abstract

Objectives: In this in vitro study, the effects of additive manufacturing (AM) methods and build angles on the trueness and precision of 3D-printed palatal plate orthodontic appliances for newborns and infants were examined.

Methods: Specimens were fabricated by different representative AM methods, including digital light processing (DLP), fused filament fabrication (FFF), and MultiJet printing (MJP). Three build angles (0°, 45°, and 90°) were used. After scanning, all specimens were analyzed using the 3D inspection software. The root mean square values were measured for trueness and precision. Color maps were created to detect deviations in samples. The data were statistically analyzed with a two-way ANOVA.

Results: The trueness and precision were statistically influenced by both AM methods and build angles (p < 0.05). Moreover, the root mean square values of the 45° DLP (0.0221 ± 0.0017 μm) and the 0° MJP (0.0217 ± 0.0014 μm) were significantly lower compared to those in other groups (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: AM methods (DLP, FFF, and MJP) and build angles (0°, 45°, and 90°) significantly impacted the dimensional accuracy of additively manufactured palatal plate orthodontic appliances. Also, the 45° DLP and the 0° MJP were associated with the highest trueness and precision.

Clinical significance: All tested AM methods with different build angles yielded clinically acceptable outcomes (within an acceptance range of ±300 μm for trueness), achieving the highest accuracy with a technology-specific suitable build angle.

Keywords: Additive manufacturing; Cleft palate plate; Precision; Stimulation plate; Trueness.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Computer-Aided Design*
Humans
Infant
Infant, Newborn
Models, Dental
Printing, Three-Dimensional*
Research Design
Software