Comparison of intraoral scanning and CBCT to generate digital and 3D-printed casts by fused deposition modeling and digital light processing

• Published in: Journal of dentistry 2023-01, Vol.128, p.104387-104387, Article 104387
• Main Authors: de Freitas, Bruna Neves, Mendonça, Lucas Moreira, Cruvinel, Pedro Bastos, de Lacerda, Tito José, Leite, Fernando Gonçalves Junqueira, Oliveira-Santos, Christiano, Tirapelli, Camila
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: 3D printing; Chi-square test; Computed tomography; Computer-Aided Design; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Conversion; Datasets; Dental Impression Technique; Dentistry; Deposition; Digital casts; Digitization; Distortion; Fused deposition modeling; Humans; Hypotheses; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Intraoral scanner; Manufacturing; Methods; Models, Dental; Printing, Three-Dimensional; Production methods; Scanning; Segmentation; Software; Spiral Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Statistics; Three dimensional printing
• ISSN: 0300-5712; 1879-176X
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104387

•Scanning and printing methods can influence trueness of dental casts.•CBCT segmentation for 3D-printing can influence cast dimensions.•Detailed methodology description is necessary for discussion of digital workflows. to evaluate trueness and precision of digital casts from intraoral scanning (IOS) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT); trueness and precision of 3D-printed casts using digital light processing (DLP) and fused deposition modeling (FDM); the influence of digitizing method in the 3D-printed casts and, to compare STL data after DICOM segmentation and conversion. a reference cast was digitized with IOS and CBCT, and 3D-printed using FDM and DLP. Linear measurements of occlusocervical (OC), interarch (IEA), and mesiodistal (MD) dimensions were taken on reference, digital and 3D-printed casts. Trueness was observed as the distortion, and precision was observed as the variation of measurements. One and Two-way ANOVA, Student t-test, and Chi-Square were applied to analyze data. distortion varied between digital casts for all dimensions; at OC, both showed expanded dimensions with IOS being significantly greater; in turn, CBCT digital casts showed higher distortion at IEA and MD. Dimensions of 3D-printed casts showed a predominance of shrinkage, DLP presented higher distortion compared to FDM for both digitizing methods. Digitizing methods influenced the 3D-printing of casts, especially for DLP. Regarding precision, no statistical difference was found. STL converted from DICOM showed statistical difference in IEA (p