3D Printing in Dental Science / Impresión 3D en la Ciencia Odontológica

3D printing is a technology that describes a manufacturing process previously planned and designed in a computer to create an object 1,2. This technology was introduced in dentistry by Chuck Hull since 1986 and allowed the automation and thus improved dental workflow 2. Technologies used in 3D printing involves: Stereolithography (SLA), bioprinting, fused deposition modeling (FDM), selective laser sintering (SLS), and PolyJet printing. We can choose one of them depending on the clinical use and material, need of accuracy among others. To 3D printing you need to use a scanner with an integrated software in order to capture the 3D images of the object being scanned. Those 3D images are stored in Standard Tessellation Language (STL) file 3. But what "Tessellation" means? Tessellation is the covering process of a surface, using one or more geometric shapes, with no overlaps and no gaps. It meansthat the object scanned is copied in detail with high reliability and then can be printed.

La impresión 3D es una tecnología que describe un proceso de fabricación previamente planificado y diseñado en un computador para crear un objeto. Esta tecnología fue introducida en odontología por Chuck Hull desde 1986 y permitió la automatización y, por lo tanto, mejoró el flujo de trabajo del consultorio. Las tecnologías utilizadas en la impresión 3D incluyen: estereolitografía (SLA), bioimpresión, modelado por deposición fundida (FDM), sinterización selectiva por láser (SLS) e impresión PolyJet. Podemoselegir uno de ellos dependiendo del uso clínico y material, necesidad de precisión entre otros.Para la impresión 3D, debe usar un escáner con un software integrado para capturar las imágenes 3D del objeto que se escanea. Esas imágenes 3D se almacenan en el archivo de Lenguaje estándar de teselado (STL). Pero, ¿qué significa "Teselado"? El teselado es el proceso de recubrimiento de una superficie, utilizando una o más formas geométricas, sin superposiciones ni espacios. Significa que el objeto escaneado secopia en detalle con alta confiabilidad y luego se puede imprimir.

Precisión de los sistemas de impresión digital intraoral en odontología restauradora: Una revisión de la literatura / Accuracy of Intraoral Digital Impression Systems in Restorative Dentistry: A Review of the Literature

Abstract: La impresión intraoral permite al odontólogo obtener directamente los datos de las piezas dentales que se requiera rehabilitar, otorgándole mayor precisión y eliminando así de la fase clínica la toma de impresión y la fabricación del modelo, aspectos sensibles a errores. El objetivo de la presente revisión es identificar el sistema de impresión digital intraoral más preciso y además identificar los factores que afectan a la precisión de esta en odontología restauradora. Mediante una revisión bibliográfica con búsqueda en las bases de datos de PubMed y Embase se obtuvieron 153 artículos, luego de la evaluación cualitativa se incluyeron en la revisión 14 que cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión y exclusión. Se determinó que la experiencia del dentista, la convergencia en la preparación dental y la terminación cervical son determinantes al momento de la toma de impresión digital, sin embargo, el uso o no de polvo no es relevante. El sistema de impresión digital Lava C.O.S., iTero y True definition son los más precisos dependiendo siempre del tipo de rehabilitación a realizar.

Abstract: Digital impresión allows the dentist to directly obtain the data of the dental pieces that neet to be rehabilitated, giving it greater precisión and thus eliminating the impression and manufacturing of the dental model, error-sensitive aspects of the clinical phase. The aim of this review is to identify the most accurate intraoral digital impression system and identifiy the factors that affect the accuracy in the restorative dentistry. Through a bibliographic review with search in PubMed and Embase databases, 153 articles were obtained, after qualitative evaluation they were included in the revisión 14 that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. It was determined that the experience of the dentist, the convergence in the dental preparation and the cervical termination are decisive at the accuracy of the digital impression, however, the use or not of dust is not relevant. The Lava C.O.S., iTero and True definition are the most accurate always depending on the type of rehabilitation to be performed.

Full mouth rehabilitation of a severely worn dentition using intraoral scanner and the CAD/CAM double scanning technique / 대한치과보철학회지

With the evolution of the computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology, the intraoral scanners are playing an increasingly important role, as they are the first step towards a completely digital workflow. The CAD/CAM double scanning technique has been used to transfer the information from provisional restorations to definitive restorations. In this case, a 67-year-old male with esthetically compromised anterior teeth, generalized severe attrition of teeth, and reduced vertical dimension was treated with full mouth rehabilitation including a re-establishment of the lost vertical dimension of occlusion assisted by the crown lengthening procedure. The provisional restorations were fabricated using an intraoral scanner and the CAD/CAM double scanning technique. After the period of adaption, the definitive monolithic zirconia restorations were delivered. The CAD/CAM double scanning technique successfully transferred the occlusal and morphological characteristics, obtained from the provisional restorations, to the definitive restorations.

Accuracy of 3D digital modeling of dental arches

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of the study was to verify and compare the accuracy of full-arch digital impressions obtained using two intraoral scanners and three scanning methodologies. Methods: A resin model created with dental 3-D printing was scanned by a reference scanner (Zfx Evolution - Zimmer Biomet, Palm Beach Gardens, FL) in order to obtain a 3D reference; the same resin model was then scanned with two different intraoral scanners (Zfx IntraScan and Carestream 3600 - CS 3600®, Carestream, Rochester, NY, USA) using: Technique A (from tooth #27 up to tooth #17); Technique B (from tooth #11 up to tooth #17 and then from tooth #21 up to tooth #27) and Technique C (from tooth #22 up to tooth #17, and then from tooth #12 up to tooth #27 - the MeshLab software v. 1.3.3 was then used to match the two scans). The scans obtained were superimposed over the reference scan by means of a software, and the volumetric discrepancies were calculated. Results: The mean results for the Zfx Intrascan scanner were: Technique A = 302.47 ± 37.42 µm; Technique B = 180.45 ± 29.86 µm; Technique C = 147.34 ± 28.23 µm. The mean results for the Carestream 3600 scanner were: Technique A = 303.59 ± 40.20 µm; Technique B = 181.53 ± 29.61 µm; Technique C = 142.28 ± 35.33 µm. Technique C, used by both scanners, produced less volumetric discrepancies compared to the other techniques. Conclusions: The scanning technique had a statistically significant effect on the quality of the scan (p< 0.0001), whereas the scanner did not present any significant influence (p= 0.91).

RESUMO Objetivo: o objetivo do presente estudo foi verificar e comparar a precisão de modelos digitais de uma arcada dentária completa obtidos utilizando-se dois tipos de scanners e três metodologias de digitalização. Métodos: um modelo de resina feito com impressão 3D foi digitalizado em um scanner de referência (Zfx Evolution - Zimmer Biomet, Palm Beach Gardens, FL) para se obter uma referência em 3D; o mesmo modelo de resina foi, então, digitalizado com dois scanners intrabucais diferentes (Zfx IntraScan e Carestream 3600 - CS 3600®, Carestream, Rochester, NY, EUA) utilizando: Técnica A (do dente #27 ao dente #17); Técnica B (do dente #11 ao dente #17 e, em seguida, do dente #21 ao dente #27); e Técnica C (do dente #22 ao dente #17 e, em seguida, do dente #12 ao dente #27 - osoftware MeshLab v. 1.3.3 foi, então, usado para mesclar as duas leituras). Em seguida, as imagens digitalizadas foram sobrepostas à imagem de referência, utilizando-se um software, e as discrepâncias volumétricas foram calculadas. Resultados: a média dos resultados para o scanner Zfx Intrascan foram: Técnica A = 302,47 ± 37,42 µm; Técnica B = 180,45 ± 29,86 µm; Técnica C = 147,34 ± 28,23 µm. A média dos resultados para o scanner Carestream 3600 foram: Técnica A= 303,59 ± 40,20 µm; Técnica B = 181,53 ± 29,61 µm; Técnica C = 142,28 ± 35,33 µm. A Técnica C, utilizada em ambos os scanners, produziu as menores discrepâncias volumétricas, quando comparada às outras técnicas. Conclusões: a técnica de digitalização teve um efeito estatisticamente significativo sobre a qualidade do modelo digital (p< 0,0001), enquanto o tipo de scanner usado não apresentou qualquer influência significativa (p= 0,91).

A new method to measure the accuracy of intraoral scanners along the complete dental arch: A pilot study

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to assess the accuracy of three intraoral scanners along the complete dental arch and evaluate the feasibility of the assessment methodology for further in vivo analysis.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A specific measurement pattern was fabricated and measured using a coordinate measuring machine for the assessment of control distances and angles. Afterwards, the pattern was placed and fixed in replica of an upper jaw for their subsequent scans (10 times) using 3 intraoral scanners, namely iTero Element1, Trios 3, and True Definition. 4 reference distances and 5 angles were measured and compared with the controls. Trueness and precision were assessed for each IOS: trueness, as the deviation of the measures from the control ones, while precision, as the dispersion of measurements in each reference parameter. These measurements were carried out using software for analyzing 3-dimensional data. Data analysis software was used for statistical and measurements analysis (α=.05).RESULTS: Significant differences (P<.05) were found depending on the intraoral scanner used. Best trueness values were achieved with iTero Element1 (mean from 10 ± 7 µm to 91 ± 63 µm) while the worst values were obtained with Trios3 (mean from 42 ± 23 µm to 174 ± 77 µm). Trueness analysis in angle measurements, as well as precision analysis, did not show conclusive results.CONCLUSION: iTero Element1 was more accurate than the current versions of Trios3 and True Definition. Importantly, the proposed methodology is considered reliable for analyzing accuracy in any dental arch length and valid for assessing both trueness and precision in an in vivo study.

A review on the accuracy assessment methods of 3-dimensional digital dental models

The aim of this article was to review various methods used to evaluate the accuracy of digital dental models. When evaluating the accuracy of digital models, the errors can be reduced by educating examiners and using artificial landmarks. The accuracy evaluation methods of digital dental models are divided into linear measurement, 2-dimensional cross-sectional analysis, and 3-dimensional best fit measurement. As the technology of scanners develops, many studies have been conducted to compare the accuracy of digital impression and conventional impression. According to improvement of scan technologies and development of 3-dimensional model analysis software, the ability to evaluate the accuracy of digital models is becoming more efficient. In this article, we describe the methods for evaluating the accuracy of a digital model and investigate effective accuracy analysis methods for each situation.

Comparison of the accuracy of intraoral scanner by three-dimensional analysis in single and 3-unit bridge abutment model: In vitro study / 대한치과보철학회지

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of three types of intraoral scanners and the accuracy of the single abutment and bridge abutment model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, a single abutment, and a bridge abutment with missing first molar was fabricated and set as the reference model. The reference model was scanned with an industrial three-dimensional scanner and set as reference scan data. The reference model was scanned five times using the three intraoral scanners (CS3600, CS3500, and EZIS PO). This was set as the evaluation scan data. In the three-dimensional analysis (Geomagic control X), the divided abutment region was selected and analyzed to verify the scan accuracy of the abutment. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software (α = .05). The accuracy of intraoral scanners was compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test and post-test was performed using the Pairwise test. The accuracy difference between the single abutment model and the bridge abutment model was analyzed by the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: The accuracy according to the intraoral scanner was significantly different (P < .05). The trueness of the single abutment model and the bridge abutment model showed a statistically significant difference and showed better trueness in the single abutment (P < .05). There was no significant difference in the precision (P = .616). CONCLUSION: As a result of comparing the accuracy of single and bridge abutments, the error of abutment scan increased with increasing scan area, and the accuracy of bridge abutment model was clinically acceptable in three types of intraoral scanners.

Clinical application of an intraoral scanner for serial evaluation of orthodontic tooth movement: A preliminary study / 대한치과교정학회지

The aim of this study was to test the clinical application of an intraoral scanner for serial evaluation of orthodontic tooth movement. The maxillary dentitions of eight patients with fixed orthodontic appliances were scanned using an intraoral scanner at the beginning of treatment (T0), and at 1 month (T1), 2 months (T2), 3 months (T3), and 4 months (T4) after T0. The serial digital models were superimposed on the palatal surface as a reference area, and the linear and angular changes of the central incisors, canines, and first molars were evaluated. The intraclass correlation coefficient and method errors showed that this method was clinically acceptable. Various types of orthodontic tooth movements, including minute movements, could be observed every month. The intraoral scanner and digital superimposition technique enabled the serial evaluation of orthodontic tooth movement without taking serial impressions and/or acquiring radiographs.

Comparison of the accuracy of digital impressions and traditional impressions: Systematic review / 대한치과보철학회지

PURPOSE: This study systematically examines literatures on the suitability of prostheses and accuracy of obtained impressions to see if digital impressions using intraoral scanners can replace traditional impressions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A MEDLINE/PubMed search and manual search was performed for studies written in English about accuracy of digital impression published in dental journals from August 1, 1997, to July 31, 2017. Depending on criteria, the data for the selected articles were independently organized into standardized spreadsheets by 2 reviewers. RESULTS: Among the total 35 studies met the inclusion criteria, there were 26 studies comparing the suitability of prostheses, and 9 studies comparing the accuracy of impressions through scan data without prostheses. Most studies used prostheses to compare the accuracy of impression techniques. CONCLUSION: This review suggests that making single crown or mesio-distally short prostheses with digital impressions is clinically reliable in natural teeth. However, there is still a limit to making mesio-distally long prostheses with digital impressions from the lack of related studies. Digital impression cannot fully replace traditional impressions in implant prostheses yet.

Questionnaire survey for the clinical trial participants who experienced both digital and conventional impression

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the patients' perception, acceptance, and preference of the difference between a conventional impression and digital impression through questionnaire survey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirteen (6 male, 7 female) subjects who experienced both digital and conventional impression at the same day were enrolled in this study. Conventional impression were taken with polyvinylsiloxane and digital impression were performed using a newly developed intra-oral scanner. Immediately after the two impressions were made, a survey was conducted with the standardized questionnaires consisting of the following three categories; 1) general dental treatment 2) satisfaction of conventional impression 3) satisfaction of digital impression. The perceived source of satisfaction was evaluated using Likert scale. The distribution of the answers was assessed by percentages and statistical analyses were performed with the paired t-test, and P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: There were significant differences of the overall satisfaction between two impression methods (P < 0.05). Digital impression showed high satisfaction in less shortness of breath and odor to participants compared to conventional impression. The use of an oral scanner resulted in a discomfort of TMJ due to prolonged mouth opening and in lower score of the scanner tip size. CONCLUSION: It was confirmed that the preference for the digital impression using intraoral scanner is higher than the conventional impression. Most survey participants said they would recommend the digital impression to others and said they preferred it for future prosthetic treatment.

Comparative study on quality of scanned images from varying materials and surface conditions of standardized model for dental scanner evaluation

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the image acquisition ability of intraoral scanners by analyzing the comprehensiveness of scanned images from standardized model, and to identify problems of the model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cast models and 3D-printed models were prepared according to international standards set by ISO12836 and ANSI/ADA no. 132, which were then scanned by model scanner and two different intraoral scanners (TRIOS3 and CS3500). The image acquisition performance of the scanners was classified into three grades, and the study was repeated with varying surface conditions of the models. RESULTS: Model scanner produced the most accurate images in all models. Meanwhile, CS3500 showed good image reproducibility for angled structures and TRIOS3 showed good image reproducibility for rounded structures. As for model ingredients, improved plaster model best reproduced scan images regardless of the type of scanner used. When limited to 3D-printed model, powdered surface condition resulted in higher image quality. CONCLUSION: When scanning structures beyond FOV (field of view) in standardized models (following ISO12836 and ANSI/ADA 132), lack of reference points to help distinguish different faces confuses the scanning and matching process, resulting in inaccurate display of images. These results imply the need to develop a new standard model not confined to simple pattern repetition and symmetric structure.

Accuracy comparison of buccal bite scans by five intra-oral scanners

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the accuracy of the interocclusal relationship between upper and lower teeth according to the buccal interocclusal record scan using various intraoral scanner systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The upper and lower full arch Models with normal occlusion were scanned with 5 intraoral scanners (Cerec Omnicam, CS3500, iTero, Trios, True Definition). Buccal interocclusal record scan was taken only at the left side while occlusion was intentionally raised by 1 mm, 2 mm, 3 mm, and 4 mm with metal cylinder core embedded within polyvinylsiloxane bite registration material at the right molar region. The superimposition analysis was done to evaluate overall three-dimensional deviation and cross-section analysis was done to evaluate the degree and the direction of deviation of interocclusal relationship. RESULTS: From the superimposition study, Cerec Omnicam showed the least deviation (165.5 µm) and CS3500 (369.0 µm) showed the largest (P < 0.01). And the deviation was greater in 3, 4, 2 mm group than 1 mm (P < 0.01). From the cross-section study, Cerec Omnicam showed the farthest deviation (−242.8 µm) and CS3500 showed the closest deviation (312.5 µm) and a significantly high value was shown in 3 mm group. CONCLUSION: Every intraoral scanner has different accuracy in reproducing interocclusal relationship.

A comparison of the accuracy of intraoral scanners using an intraoral environment simulator

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to design an intraoral environment simulator and to assess the accuracy of two intraoral scanners using the simulator. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A box-shaped intraoral environment simulator was designed to simulate two specific intraoral environments. The cast was scanned 10 times by Identica Blue (MEDIT, Seoul, South Korea), TRIOS (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark), and CS3500 (Carestream Dental, Georgia, USA) scanners in the two simulated groups. The distances between the left and right canines (D3), first molars (D6), second molars (D7), and the left canine and left second molar (D37) were measured. The distance data were analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: The differences in intraoral environments were not statistically significant (P>.05). Between intraoral scanners, statistically significant differences (P < .05) were revealed by the Kruskal-Wallis test with regard to D3 and D6. CONCLUSION: No difference due to the intraoral environment was revealed. The simulator will contribute to the higher accuracy of intraoral scanners in the future.

Immediate loading of mandibular single implant by using surgical guide and modeless digital prosthesis: a case report

In this case report, immediate loading of an implant-supported single-tooth prosthesis through complete digital workflow. A patient presented for restoration of missing a single tooth in the mandibular first molar. The digital impression was made with intraoral scanner and implant was placed using surgical guide pre-fabricated with pre-operative computed tomography (CT) and scan data. After 1 week later, prefabricated customized abutment and provisional restoration were connected for immediate loading. After 8 weeks later, abutment level impression was taken by intraoral scanner. At 3 months later from implant installation, monolithic zirconia crown were fabricated. This clinical report presents satisfying result in accuracy and patient satisfaction. A completely modeless digital procedure met expectations regarding precision, esthetics, and functionality.

Comparative analysis on reproducibility among 5 intraoral scanners: sectional analysis according to restoration type and preparation outline form

PURPOSE: The trueness and precision of acquired images of intraoral digital scanners could be influenced by restoration type, preparation outline form, scanning technology and the application of power. The aim of this study is to perform the comparative evaluation of the 3-dimensional reproducibility of intraoral scanners (IOSs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The phantom containing five prepared teeth was scanned by the reference scanner (Dental Wings) and 5 test IOSs (E4D dentist, Fastscan, iTero, Trios and Zfx Intrascan). The acquired images of the scanner groups were compared with the image from the reference scanner (trueness) and within each scanner groups (precision). Statistical analysis was performed using independent two-samples t-test and analysis of variance (α=.05). RESULTS: The average deviations of trueness and precision of Fastscan, iTero and Trios were significantly lower than the other scanners. According to the restoration type, significantly higher trueness was observed in crown and inlay than in bridge. However, no significant difference was observed among four sites of preparation outline form. If compared by the characteristics of IOS, high trueness was observed in the group adopting the active triangulation and using powder. However, there was no significant difference between the still image acquisition and video acquisition groups. CONCLUSION: Except for two intraoral scanners, Fastscan, iTero and Trios displayed comparable levels of trueness and precision values in tested phantom model. Difference in trueness was observed depending on the restoration type, the preparation outline form and characteristics of IOS, which should be taken into consideration when the intraoral scanning data are utilized.

Creating a digitized database of maxillofacial prostheses (obturators): A pilot study

PURPOSE: This study aimed to create a digitized database of fabricated obturators to be kept for patients' potential emergency needs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A chairside intraoral scanner was used to scan the surfaces of an acrylic resin obturator. The scanned data was recorded and saved as a single standard tessellation language file using a three-dimensional modeling software. A simulated obturator model was manufactured using fused deposition modeling technique in a three-dimensional printer. RESULTS: The entire obturator was successfully scanned regardless of its structural complexity, modeled as three-dimensional data, and stored in the digital system of our clinic at a relatively small size (19.6 MB). A simulated obturator model was then accurately manufactured from these data. CONCLUSION: This study provides a proof-of-concept for the use of digital technology to create a digitized database of obturators for edentulous maxillectomy patients.

Superimposition: a simple method to minimize occlusal adjustment of monolithic restoration / 대한치과보철학회지

The development of translucent zirconia enabled clinicians to choose a monolithic zirconia crown as one treatment modality in the posterior dentition. Careful occlusal adjustments are recommended for monolithic zirconia crowns because grinding zirconia inevitably causes phase transformation, which may deteriorate mechanical properties. intraoral scanners enable the clinician to scan and superimpose a complete tooth structure before preparation onto the prepared abutment. This technique helps to reproduce the original tooth form and occlusion of the patient. In this case report, prostheses were fabricated for patients with cracked or fractured tooth by applying intraoral scanner, Computer aided design-computer aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) and monolithic zirconia crown to reproduce the occlusion of original tooth and to minimize occlusal adjustment. The clinical results were satisfactory in both esthetic and functional aspects.

The user-friendly, ergonomic design aspect of recent intraoral scanners: a literature review

Recently, traditional impression has been rapidly replaced by digital impression using intraoral scanning. There are more than 7 types of intraoral scanners available in the dental market. It is difficult to make effective strategic choices due to a lack of standards and guidelines for optimal intraoral scanning devices. So far, little has been reported about evaluating the ergonomic aspect of these scanners. This literature review compares current intraoral scanning systems based on different types of handles and suggests the most comfortable, user-friendly intraoral scanners from an ergonomic standpoint.

Clinical case of implant restoration using customized healing abutment / 대한치과보철학회지

Aesthetic impression is emphasized in the recent field of implant restoration. However, there is limitation of creating proper shape of soft tissue as well as cervical emergence profile due to the use of pre-existing healing abutment in the process of initial post-operative soft tissue healing period. Designing the shape of abutment into the final customized abutment instead of its original shape helped to achieve more aesthetic implant restoration by applying healing abutment which could minimize the malposition and recession of soft tissue. In this study, soft tissue healing was promoted using the post-operative customized healing abutment and thereby obtained the result of more aesthetic and functional restoration by minimizing displacement of soft tissue in the process of applying final customized abutment.

Digital intraoral impression for immediate provisional restoration of maxillary single implant: A case report / 대한치과보철학회지

Developing of digital technique, it is possible to fabricate implant prostheses for edentulous area using intraoral 3-dimentional information throughout implant diagnosis and treatment process. It is being changed that from the method using CAD/CAM, producing prostheses by model scanning after conventional impression and model processing, to the method of fabricating implant provisional restorations and customized abutments by digital impression after connecting digital impression copings (scanbody) and implant fixtures without models. But, this digital method has not been actively used for implant prostheses not yet. Specially, it is short of intraoral digital impression cases for immediate provisional restorations of the maxillary anterior implants. The gingival contour impression of maxillary anterior area is very important for esthetic restorations. Accordingly, in this case report, the using a digital impression coping (scanbody) and digital impression by CEREC Omnicam (Sirona, Bensheim, Germany) or Trios (3shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) were introduced for immediate provisional restorations in 3 cases needed a single implant restoration in maxillary anterior area. The clinical results were satisfactory on the convenience and accuracy of digital impression technique and the good esthetics of final restorations.