Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies
This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Lukas Wegmüller [verfasserIn] Florian Halbeisen [verfasserIn] Neha Sharma [verfasserIn] Sebastian Kühl [verfasserIn] Florian M. Thieringer [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2021 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Journal of Clinical Medicine - MDPI AG, 2013, 10(2021), 21, p 4894 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:10 ; year:2021 ; number:21, p 4894 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.3390/jcm10214894 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
DOAJ051475545 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | DOAJ051475545 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20240412133824.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230227s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.3390/jcm10214894 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ051475545 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJ54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
100 | 0 | |a Lukas Wegmüller |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies |
264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide’s original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were—MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (<i<p</i< < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs. | ||
650 | 4 | |a three-dimensional | |
650 | 4 | |a printing | |
650 | 4 | |a biocompatible materials | |
650 | 4 | |a computer-aided design | |
650 | 4 | |a surgical | |
650 | 4 | |a patient-specific | |
653 | 0 | |a Medicine | |
653 | 0 | |a R | |
700 | 0 | |a Florian Halbeisen |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Neha Sharma |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Sebastian Kühl |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Florian M. Thieringer |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Journal of Clinical Medicine |d MDPI AG, 2013 |g 10(2021), 21, p 4894 |w (DE-627)718632478 |w (DE-600)2662592-1 |x 20770383 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:10 |g year:2021 |g number:21, p 4894 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10214894 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/21/4894 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 10 |j 2021 |e 21, p 4894 |
author_variant |
l w lw f h fh n s ns s k sk f m t fmt |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:20770383:2021----::osmrsihn3pitrfruddmlnsreynniracrcassmnsuyf |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2021 |
publishDate |
2021 |
allfields |
10.3390/jcm10214894 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051475545 (DE-599)DOAJ54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Lukas Wegmüller verfasserin aut Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide’s original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were—MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (<i<p</i< < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs. three-dimensional printing biocompatible materials computer-aided design surgical patient-specific Medicine R Florian Halbeisen verfasserin aut Neha Sharma verfasserin aut Sebastian Kühl verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Journal of Clinical Medicine MDPI AG, 2013 10(2021), 21, p 4894 (DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 20770383 nnns volume:10 year:2021 number:21, p 4894 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10214894 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/21/4894 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2021 21, p 4894 |
spelling |
10.3390/jcm10214894 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051475545 (DE-599)DOAJ54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Lukas Wegmüller verfasserin aut Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide’s original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were—MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (<i<p</i< < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs. three-dimensional printing biocompatible materials computer-aided design surgical patient-specific Medicine R Florian Halbeisen verfasserin aut Neha Sharma verfasserin aut Sebastian Kühl verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Journal of Clinical Medicine MDPI AG, 2013 10(2021), 21, p 4894 (DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 20770383 nnns volume:10 year:2021 number:21, p 4894 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10214894 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/21/4894 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2021 21, p 4894 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.3390/jcm10214894 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051475545 (DE-599)DOAJ54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Lukas Wegmüller verfasserin aut Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide’s original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were—MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (<i<p</i< < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs. three-dimensional printing biocompatible materials computer-aided design surgical patient-specific Medicine R Florian Halbeisen verfasserin aut Neha Sharma verfasserin aut Sebastian Kühl verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Journal of Clinical Medicine MDPI AG, 2013 10(2021), 21, p 4894 (DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 20770383 nnns volume:10 year:2021 number:21, p 4894 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10214894 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/21/4894 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2021 21, p 4894 |
allfieldsGer |
10.3390/jcm10214894 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051475545 (DE-599)DOAJ54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Lukas Wegmüller verfasserin aut Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide’s original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were—MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (<i<p</i< < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs. three-dimensional printing biocompatible materials computer-aided design surgical patient-specific Medicine R Florian Halbeisen verfasserin aut Neha Sharma verfasserin aut Sebastian Kühl verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Journal of Clinical Medicine MDPI AG, 2013 10(2021), 21, p 4894 (DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 20770383 nnns volume:10 year:2021 number:21, p 4894 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10214894 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/21/4894 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2021 21, p 4894 |
allfieldsSound |
10.3390/jcm10214894 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051475545 (DE-599)DOAJ54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Lukas Wegmüller verfasserin aut Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide’s original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were—MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (<i<p</i< < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs. three-dimensional printing biocompatible materials computer-aided design surgical patient-specific Medicine R Florian Halbeisen verfasserin aut Neha Sharma verfasserin aut Sebastian Kühl verfasserin aut Florian M. Thieringer verfasserin aut In Journal of Clinical Medicine MDPI AG, 2013 10(2021), 21, p 4894 (DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 20770383 nnns volume:10 year:2021 number:21, p 4894 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10214894 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/21/4894 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 10 2021 21, p 4894 |
language |
English |
source |
In Journal of Clinical Medicine 10(2021), 21, p 4894 volume:10 year:2021 number:21, p 4894 |
sourceStr |
In Journal of Clinical Medicine 10(2021), 21, p 4894 volume:10 year:2021 number:21, p 4894 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
three-dimensional printing biocompatible materials computer-aided design surgical patient-specific Medicine R |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
Journal of Clinical Medicine |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Lukas Wegmüller @@aut@@ Florian Halbeisen @@aut@@ Neha Sharma @@aut@@ Sebastian Kühl @@aut@@ Florian M. Thieringer @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2021-01-01T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
718632478 |
id |
DOAJ051475545 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ051475545</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240412133824.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3390/jcm10214894</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ051475545</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lukas Wegmüller</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide’s original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were—MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (<i<p</i< < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">three-dimensional</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">printing</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">biocompatible materials</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">computer-aided design</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">surgical</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">patient-specific</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Florian Halbeisen</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Neha Sharma</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sebastian Kühl</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Florian M. Thieringer</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Clinical Medicine</subfield><subfield code="d">MDPI AG, 2013</subfield><subfield code="g">10(2021), 21, p 4894</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)718632478</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2662592-1</subfield><subfield code="x">20770383</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:10</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:21, p 4894</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10214894</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/21/4894</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">10</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">21, p 4894</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Lukas Wegmüller |
spellingShingle |
Lukas Wegmüller misc three-dimensional misc printing misc biocompatible materials misc computer-aided design misc surgical misc patient-specific misc Medicine misc R Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies |
authorStr |
Lukas Wegmüller |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)718632478 |
format |
electronic Article |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
DOAJ |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
20770383 |
topic_title |
Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies three-dimensional printing biocompatible materials computer-aided design surgical patient-specific |
topic |
misc three-dimensional misc printing misc biocompatible materials misc computer-aided design misc surgical misc patient-specific misc Medicine misc R |
topic_unstemmed |
misc three-dimensional misc printing misc biocompatible materials misc computer-aided design misc surgical misc patient-specific misc Medicine misc R |
topic_browse |
misc three-dimensional misc printing misc biocompatible materials misc computer-aided design misc surgical misc patient-specific misc Medicine misc R |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Journal of Clinical Medicine |
hierarchy_parent_id |
718632478 |
hierarchy_top_title |
Journal of Clinical Medicine |
isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)718632478 (DE-600)2662592-1 |
title |
Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)DOAJ051475545 (DE-599)DOAJ54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da |
title_full |
Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies |
author_sort |
Lukas Wegmüller |
journal |
Journal of Clinical Medicine |
journalStr |
Journal of Clinical Medicine |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2021 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
author_browse |
Lukas Wegmüller Florian Halbeisen Neha Sharma Sebastian Kühl Florian M. Thieringer |
container_volume |
10 |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Lukas Wegmüller |
doi_str_mv |
10.3390/jcm10214894 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
consumer vs. high-end 3d printers for guided implant surgery—an in vitro accuracy assessment study of different 3d printing technologies |
title_auth |
Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies |
abstract |
This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide’s original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were—MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (<i<p</i< < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs. |
abstractGer |
This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide’s original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were—MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (<i<p</i< < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs. |
abstract_unstemmed |
This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide’s original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were—MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (<i<p</i< < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs. |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
21, p 4894 |
title_short |
Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies |
url |
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10214894 https://doaj.org/article/54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/21/4894 https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383 |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Florian Halbeisen Neha Sharma Sebastian Kühl Florian M. Thieringer |
author2Str |
Florian Halbeisen Neha Sharma Sebastian Kühl Florian M. Thieringer |
ppnlink |
718632478 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.3390/jcm10214894 |
up_date |
2024-07-03T20:34:09.939Z |
_version_ |
1803591457117831168 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ051475545</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240412133824.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3390/jcm10214894</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ051475545</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lukas Wegmüller</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery—An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (<i<n </i<= 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide’s original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were—MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (<i<p</i< < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">three-dimensional</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">printing</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">biocompatible materials</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">computer-aided design</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">surgical</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">patient-specific</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Florian Halbeisen</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Neha Sharma</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sebastian Kühl</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Florian M. Thieringer</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Clinical Medicine</subfield><subfield code="d">MDPI AG, 2013</subfield><subfield code="g">10(2021), 21, p 4894</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)718632478</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2662592-1</subfield><subfield code="x">20770383</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:10</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:21, p 4894</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10214894</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/54dfd7b164ab45568180700e727669da</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/21/4894</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2077-0383</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">10</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">21, p 4894</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.400215 |