Accuracy of two 3D printing technologies in manufacturing of dental implant surgical guides (An in vitro study) | ||
| Egyptian Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery | ||
| Volume 15, Issue 1, January 2024, Pages 6-10 PDF (444.15 K) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/OMX.2024.251878.1212 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Islam Shaker* 1; Doaa Elkady2 | ||
| 1Lecturer of oral and maxillofacial radiology, faculty of dentistry, Misr international university | ||
| 2Lecturer of prosthodontics, faculty of dentistry, Cairo university | ||
| Abstract | ||
| The development of guided implant surgery helps to optimize the placement of dental implants. Planning softwares used and then the guide manufactured using 3D printing with different technologies that may affect the manufactured guide . Stereolithography and fused deposition modeling are presently the two primary 3D printing techniques. In order to produce objects, both procedures add material layer by layer. Fused deposition modeling (FDM) creates items by extruding semi-liquid plastic in a predetermined arrangement, while Stereolithography (SLA) employs a UV light source to cure resin selectively. The aim of this study is to determine the accuracy of two 3D printing technologies in manufacturing dental implant surgical guides. Eighteen dental stone models with twenty five missing teeth were CBCT scanned and planed for implant placement using the same software then 3D printed using stereolithography (SLA) and fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printing technologies. The surgical guide tubes diameter was measured and compared to the planed tube diameter. The results showed no statistically significant difference between the accuracy of the two 3D printing technologies with the FDM showing lower accuracy. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| 3D printing; guided implant surgery; surgical guide | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 127 PDF Download: 273 |
||
