Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 26, 2025
06:51
Measuring the Complete-arch Distortion of an Optical Dental Impression
Published on: May 30, 2019
7.7K
Trueness, 3D Deviation, Time and Cost Comparisons Between Milled and 3D-Printed Resin Single Crowns
J No-Cortes1, A P Ayres2, J F Lima3
1Faculty of Dental Surgery, University of Malta, Malta.
Summary
Milled and 3D-printed resin crowns showed similar accuracy, but 3D-printed ones had greater deviations at margins and occlusal surfaces. Milling is more expensive, while 3D-printing offers lower costs and higher production rates.
Area of Science:
- Digital Dentistry
- Dental Materials Science
- CAD/CAM Technology
Background:
- Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technologies are revolutionizing dental prosthodontics.
- Milling and 3D-printing represent two prominent additive and subtractive manufacturing methods for fabricating dental restorations.
- Evaluating the comparative performance of these techniques is crucial for optimizing clinical workflows and patient outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the trueness, 3D deviation, production time, and costs of milled versus 3D-printed resin single crowns.
- To assess the dimensional accuracy of crowns fabricated using both subtractive (milling) and additive (3D-printing) CAD/CAM methods.
- To analyze the economic viability and production efficiency of each manufacturing technique.
Main Methods:
- Fabrication of 20 resin single crowns (10 milled, 10 3D-printed) from 10 digital wax patterns using CAD/CAM technology.
- Standardized linear measurements using CAD software and physical measurements with a digital caliper.
- Intraoral scanning to assess 3D deviation, focusing on cervical margins and occlusal surfaces.
- Comparative analysis of production time, costs, and production rates for both milling and 3D-printing.
Main Results:
- No statistically significant differences in linear measurements were found between milled and 3D-printed crowns compared to controls (P > .05).
- 3D-printed crowns exhibited significantly greater deviations in cervical margins (P=.032) and occlusal surfaces (P=.041) than milled crowns.
- 3D-printing required significantly more time per crown (P=.001) but offered a cheaper cost and higher production rate compared to milling.
Conclusions:
- Milling technology produces resin single crowns with superior marginal and occlusal fit compared to 3D-printing.
- While 3D-printing is more time-consuming per unit, it presents a more cost-effective and efficient manufacturing option.
- The choice between milling and 3D-printing depends on balancing the need for precise fit with cost and production efficiency considerations in dental applications.
