Evaluating the accuracy between hollow and solid dental aligner models: a comparative study of printing technologies
, , oraz
24 wrz 2024
O artykule
Data publikacji: 24 wrz 2024
Zakres stron: 51 - 62
Otrzymano: 01 kwi 2024
Przyjęty: 01 sie 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-2024-0023
Słowa kluczowe
© 2024 Ebru Yurdakurban et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Comparisons of Canine-Premolar Regions RMS values
Canine-Premolar Region (Right) | Canine-Premolar Region (Left) | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DLP1 | Polyjet2 | SLA3 | DLP1 | Polyjet2 | SLA3 | ||||||
Designs | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Post-hoc1 | Designs | Mean±SD | Mean±SD | Mean±SD | p1 | Post Hoc1 | |
1 mmA (n = 10) | 0.1 ±0.02 | 0.15 ±0.09 | 0.16 ±0.10 | 0.238 | — | 1 mmA (n=10) | 0.3 ±0.15 | 0.14 ± 0.1 1 | 0.41 ±0.19 | 0.002 | 2-3 |
2 mmB (n = 10) | 0.08 ±0.01 | 0.06 ±0.01 | 0.14 ±0.06 | 0.002 | 1-2 |
2 mmB (n=10) | 0.16 ± 0.03 | 0.06 ± 0.01 | 0.15 ± 0.05 | 0.001 | 1-2 |
3 mnC (n = 10) | 0.07 ±0.03 | 0.05±<0.01 | 0.10 ±0.03 | 0.008 | 2-3 |
3 mmC (n=10) | 0.09 ± 0.02 | 0.05±<0.01 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | <0.001 | 1-2 |
SolidD (n = 10) | 0.07 ±0.01 | 0.05 ±0.01 | 0.05 ±0.01 | <0.001 | 1-2 |
SolidD (n=10) | 0.06 ± 0.01 | 0.05 ± 0.01 | 0.05±<0.0l | <0.001 | 1-2 |
p2 | 0.003 | <0.001 | 0.001 | p2 | <0.001 | 0.001 | <0.001 | ||||
Post-hoc2 | A-C |
A-B |
A-D |
Post-hoc2 | A-B |
A-B |
A-B |
||||
A-C |
A-C |
A-C |
A-C |
||||||||
A-D |
A-D |
A-D |
A-D |
Comparisons of Molar Regions RMS values
Molar Region (Right) | Molar Region (Left) | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DLP1 | Polyjet2 | SLA3 | DLP1 | Polyjet2 | SLA3 | ||||||
Designs | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Post-hoc1 | Designs | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Post-hoc1 | ||
1 mmA (n = 10) | 0.17 ±0.02 | 0.36 ± 0.26 | 0.41 ±0.13 | 0.033 | 1-3 |
1 mmA (n=10) | 0.72 ± 0.30 | 0.26 ±0.18 | 0.90 ±0.35 | <0.001 | 1-2 |
2 mmB (n = 10) | 0.16 ±0.04 | 0.10 ± 0.04 | 0.35 ± 0.08 | <0.001 | 1-2 |
2 mmB (n=10) | 0.52 ± 0.06 | 0.10 ±0,03 | 0.41 ±0.13 | <0.001 | 1-2 |
3 mmC (n = 10) | 0.15 ±0.06 | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.32 ± 0.26 | 0.028 | 1-2 |
3 mmC (n=10) | 0.34 ± 0.05 | 0.08 ±0.01 | 0.27 ±0.05 | <0.001 | 1-2 |
SolidD (n = 10) | 0.13 ±0.02 | 0.06 ± 0.02 | 0.12 ± 0.01 | <0.001 | 1-2 |
SolidD (n=10) | 0.25 ± 0.02 | 0.05 ±0.01 | 0.13 ±0.01 | <0.001 | 1-2 |
p2 | 0.143 | <0.001 | <0.001 | p2 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||||
Post-hoc2 | A-C |
A-B |
A-D |
Post-hoc2 | A-B |
A-B |
A-B |
||||
A-C |
A-C |
A-C |
A-D |
||||||||
A-D |
A-D |
A-D |
Comparisons of Total Arch RMS values
DLP1 | Polyjet2 | SLA3 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Designs | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Post-hoc1 | |
1 mmA (n = 10) | 0.36 ± 0.14 | 0.29 ± 0.13 | 0.57 ± 0.15 | 0.001 | 2-3 |
2 mmB (n = 10) | 0.26 ± 0.04 | 0.18 ± 0.07 | 0.34 ± 0.06 | 0.002 | 1-2 |
3 mmC (n = 10) | 0.21 ± 0.04 | 0.13 ± 0.06 | 0.24 ± 0.05 | <0.001 | 1-2 |
SolidD (n=10) | 0.09 ± 0.01 | 0.08 ± 0.03 | 0.14 ± 0.01 | <0.001 | 1-3 |
p2 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||
Post-hoc2 | A-B |
A-B |
A-B |
||
A-D |
A-D |
A-C |
|||
B-D |
B-D |
A-D |
|||
C-D |
B-D |
Percentages of resin amounts to be saved by using hollow models instead of solid models
Hollow Designs | DLP | Polyjet | SLA |
---|---|---|---|
1 mm | 70.8% | 37.4% | 57.3% |
2 mm | 45.3% | 26.8% | 39.7% |
3 mm | 31.4% | 15.5% | 26.5% |
Comparisons of Anterior Region RMS values
DLP1 | Polyjet2 | SLA3 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Designs | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Post-hoc1 | |
1 mmA (n = 10) | 0.08 ± 0.04 | 0.10 ± 0.02 | 0.12 ± 0.03 | 0.040 | >0.05 |
2 mmB (n = 10) | 0.06 ± 0.01 | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.09 ± 0.02 | <0.001 | 1-3 |
3 mmC (n = 10) | 0.06 ± <0.01 | 0.06 ± 0.01 | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.002 | 1-2 |
SolidD (n = 10) | 0.05 ± 0.01 | 0.06 ± 0.01 | 0.04±<0.01 | <0.001 | 1-2 |
p2 | 0.003 | <0.001 | 0.001 | ||
Post-hoc2 | A-D |
A-B |
A-B |
||
A-D |
A-D |
||||
B-D |