Comparison of gap width of thermoformed clear aligners produced by different 3D printers
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.4322/bds.2025.e4696Abstract
Background: Although clear aligners have been widely used in orthodontics, factors such as thickness and fit are still little studied. In addition, other clinical aspects, such as optical properties, forces and moments and predictability of movement, are fundamental issues for the consolidation of this innovative therapeutic approach. This study aimed to assess how clear aligners manufacturing is impacted by 3D printer techniques and their thermoforming processes through analysis of the model-aligner interface. Methods: Models were printed on three different printers with distinct printing technologies, namely FDM (fused deposition material), SLA (stereolithography apparatus), and DLP (digital light processor). In each case, two resolutions were investigated (i.e. 25 µm and 100 µm). Polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG) sheets (Track A, ForestadentTM, Germany) were made using a thermoforming machine (Plastvac P7, Bio-Art, Brazil) to simulate the orthodontic clear aligner. A universal cutting machine (IsoMet 1000 Precision Cutter, Buehler, UK) was employed to obtain sections of the model-sheet set at the central incisor, canine, first premolar, and first molar regions in the lower arch. The GAP width between models and aligners was obtained through stereomicroscopy (Zeiss, Germany) and measured with Image J/Java software, version 1.46r. Statistical differences were obtained through Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s posthoc test at a significance level of 5%. Results: Gap differences were smaller for SLA and DLP when compared to FDM 3D printer technologies. It was observed that smaller resolutions (100 µm) displayed higher gap widths, relating precision to higher resolutions (25 µm). The assessment of the dental regions did not reveal any distinction relating to resolution or printer techniques. Conclusion: This study showed that SLA and DLP printers produced more precise models than FDM printers used in orthodontics for clear aligners. Factors such as cost, speed and printing capacity may be more important than resolution and GAP for the production of clear aligners in orthodontics.
Keywords: 3D printing; Biomechanics; Clear aligners; Digital orthodontics; Orthodontic appliances.
Published
Issue
Section
License
COPYRIGHT TRANSFER AND RESPONSIBILITY STATEMENT
(PDF)
For all articles published in the BDS journal, copyright is retained by the authors. Articles are licensed under an open-access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted, provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work while ensuring that the authors receive proper credit. All metadata associated with published articles is released under the Creative Commons CC0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.
Before the submission, authors must obtain permission to reproduce any published material (figures, schemes, tables, or any extract of a text) that does not fall into the public domain or for which they do not hold the copyright. Permission should be requested by the authors from the copyright holder (usually the Publisher, please refer to the imprint of the individual publications to identify the copyright holder).
The authors hereby attest that the study is original and does not present manipulated data, fraud, or plagiarism. All names listed made a significant scientific contribution to the study, are aware of the presented data, and agree with the final version of the manuscript. They assume complete responsibility for the ethical aspects of the study.
This text must be printed and signed by all authors. The scanned version should be submitted as supplemental file during the submission process.
