Title: | Comparative Analysis between 3D-Printed Models Designed with Generic and Dental-Specific Software |
Authors: | Abad Coronel, Cristian Gustavo Pazan Morales, Domenica Patricia Larriva Loyola, Jaime Alejandro Hidalgo Tamayo, Maria Lorena |
metadata.dc.ucuenca.correspondencia: | Abad Coronel, Cristian Gustavo, cristian.abad@ucuenca.edu.ec |
Keywords: | Digital workflow 3D models Software CADCAM STL |
metadata.dc.ucuenca.areaconocimientofrascatiamplio: | 3. Ciencias Médicas y de la Salud |
metadata.dc.ucuenca.areaconocimientofrascatidetallado: | 3.2.15 Odontología |
metadata.dc.ucuenca.areaconocimientofrascatiespecifico: | 3.2 Medicina Clínica |
metadata.dc.ucuenca.areaconocimientounescoamplio: | 09 - Salud y Bienestar |
metadata.dc.ucuenca.areaconocimientounescodetallado: | 0911 - Estudios Dentales |
metadata.dc.ucuenca.areaconocimientounescoespecifico: | 091 - Salud |
Issue Date: | 2023 |
metadata.dc.ucuenca.volumen: | Volumen 11, número 9 |
metadata.dc.source: | Dentistry Journal |
metadata.dc.identifier.doi: | 10.3390/dj11090216 |
metadata.dc.type: | ARTÍCULO |
Abstract: | With the great demand in the market for new dental software, the need has been seen to
carry out a precision study for applications in digital dentistry, for which there is no comparative
study, and there is a general ignorance regarding their applications. The purpose of this study was
to investigate the accuracy differences between digital impressions obtained using generic G-CAD
(general CAD) and D-CAD (CAD dental) software. Today, there is a difference between the design
software used in dentistry and these in common use. Thus, it is necessary to make a comparison of
precision software for specific and generic dental use. We hypothesized that there is no significant
difference between the software for specific and general dental use. Methods: A typodont was
digitized with an intraoral scanner and the models obtained were exported in STL format to four
different softwares (Autodesk MeshMixer 3.5, Exocad Dental, Blender for dental, and InLAB). The
STL files obtained by each software were materialized using a 3D printer. The printed models were
scanned and exported in STL files, with which six pairs of groups were formed. The groups were
compared using analysis software (3D Geomagic Control X) by superimposing them in the initial
alignment order and using the best fit method. Results: There were no significant differences between
the four analyzed software types; however, group 4, composed of the combination of D-CAD (Blender–
InLAB), obtained the highest average (0.0324 SD = 0.0456), with a higher accuracy compared to the
group with the lowest average (group 5, composed of the combination of the Meshmixer and Blender
models), a generic software and a specific software (0.1024 SD = 0.0819). Conclusion: Although
no evidence of significant difference was found regarding the accuracy of 3D models produced by
G-CAD and D-CAD, combinations of groups where specific dental design software was present
showed higher accuracy (precision and trueness). The comparison of the 3D graphics obtained with
the superimposition of the digital meshes of the printed models performed with the help of the
analysis software using the best fit method, replicating the same five reference points for the six
groups formed, evidenced a greater tolerance in the groups using D-CAD. |
URI: | http://dspace.ucuenca.edu.ec/handle/123456789/43038 https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6767/11/9/216 |
metadata.dc.ucuenca.urifuente: | https://www.mdpi.com/journal/dentistry |
ISSN: | 2304-6767 |
Appears in Collections: | Artículos
|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.