Comparison of prosthetic models produced by traditional and additive manufacturing methods

被引:31
|
作者
Park, Jin-Young [1 ]
Kim, Hae-Young [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Kim, Ji-Hwan [1 ]
Kim, Jae-Hong [1 ]
Kim, Woong-Chul [1 ]
机构
[1] Korea Univ, Dept Dent Lab Sci & Engn, Coll Hlth Sci, Seoul 02841, South Korea
[2] Korea Univ, Grad Shchool, Dept Publ Hlth Sci, Seoul 02841, South Korea
[3] Korea Univ, Program Publ Hlth Sci BK21, Seoul 02841, South Korea
来源
JOURNAL OF ADVANCED PROSTHODONTICS | 2015年 / 7卷 / 04期
关键词
Additive manufacturing; Subtractive manufacturing; Multi Jet Modeling; Micro-SLA; Marginal gap; Internal gap; MARGINAL FIT; INTERNAL FIT; CROWNS; ADAPTATION; ACCURACY; SYSTEMS;
D O I
10.4047/jap.2015.7.4.294
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
PURPOSE. The purpose of this study was to verify the clinical-feasibility of additive manufacturing by comparing the accuracy of four different manufacturing methods for metal coping: the conventional lost wax technique (CLWT); subtractive methods with wax blank milling (WBM); and two additive methods, multi jet modeling (MJM), and micro-stereolithography (Micro-SLA). MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty study models were created using an acrylic model with the maxillary upper right canine, first premolar, and first molar teeth. Based on the scan files from a non-contact blue light scanner (Identica; Medit Co. Ltd., Seoul, Korea), thirty cores were produced using the WBM, MJM, and Micro-SLA methods, respectively, and another thirty frameworks were produced using the CLWT method. To measure the marginal and internal gap, the silicone replica method was adopted, and the silicone images obtained were evaluated using a digital microscope (KH-7700; Hirox, Tokyo, Japan) at 140X magnification. Analyses were performed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc test (alpha=.05). RESULTS. The mean marginal gaps and internal gaps showed significant differences according to tooth type (P<.001 and P<.001, respectively) and manufacturing method (P<.037 and P<.001, respectively). Micro-SLA did not show any significant difference from CLWT regarding mean marginal gap compared to the WBM and MJM methods. CONCLUSION. The mean values of gaps resulting from the four different manufacturing methods were within a clinically allowable range, and, thus, the clinical use of additive manufacturing methods is acceptable as an alternative to the traditional lost wax-technique and subtractive manufacturing.
引用
收藏
页码:294 / 302
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] PROPOSALS FOR THE OPTIMIZATION OF PIECES PRODUCED BY ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING
    Garcia-Dominguez, Amabel
    Claver-Gil, Juan
    Angel Sebastian-Perez, Miguel
    DYNA, 2018, 93 (03):
  • [42] Mechanical performance of PEEK produced by additive manufacturing
    Hoskins, T. J.
    Dearn, K. D.
    Kukureka, S. N.
    POLYMER TESTING, 2018, 70 : 511 - 519
  • [43] Status and progress of additive manufacturing of zirconia ceramics for dental prosthetic
    Guo H.
    Tang H.
    Xing W.
    Qi H.
    Tan W.
    Lin H.
    Zhongguo Youse Jinshu Xuebao/Chinese Journal of Nonferrous Metals, 2024, 34 (04): : 1308 - 1328
  • [44] Design and analysis of prosthetic foot using additive manufacturing technique
    Vijayan, V.
    Kumar, S. Arun
    Gautham, S.
    Masthan, M. Mohamed
    Piraichudan, N.
    MATERIALS TODAY-PROCEEDINGS, 2021, 37 : 1665 - 1671
  • [45] Comparison of Different Additive Manufacturing Methods for 316L Stainless Steel
    Bedmar, Javier
    Riquelme, Ainhoa
    Rodrigo, Pilar
    Torres, Belen
    Rams, Joaquin
    MATERIALS, 2021, 14 (21)
  • [46] Evaluation of SHM System Produced by Additive Manufacturing via Acoustic Emission and Other NDT Methods
    Strantza, Maria
    Aggelis, Dimitrios G.
    de Baere, Dieter
    Guillaume, Patrick
    van Hemelrijck, Danny
    SENSORS, 2015, 15 (10) : 26709 - 26725
  • [47] Prediction of the vibratory properties of ship models with realistic structural configurations produced using additive manufacturing
    Grammatikopoulos, Apostolos
    Banks, Joseph
    Temarel, Pandeli
    MARINE STRUCTURES, 2020, 73
  • [48] A review of synthesis methods for additive manufacturing
    Rosen, David W.
    VIRTUAL AND PHYSICAL PROTOTYPING, 2016, 11 (04) : 305 - 317
  • [49] Inferential Methods for Additive Manufacturing Feedback
    Limoge, Damas W.
    Gooshki, Sadegh Nouri
    Hough, Fabian
    Nirmaleswaran, Aswin
    Pinskiy, Vadim
    2020 AMERICAN CONTROL CONFERENCE (ACC), 2020, : 492 - 499
  • [50] Design for Additive Manufacturing: Methods and Tools
    Mandolini, Marco
    Pradel, Patrick
    Cicconi, Paolo
    APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL, 2022, 12 (13):