Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Influence of thermoforming techniques on thickness distribution of in-office aligners: a micro-computed tomography analysis.

The Angle orthodontist·2026
Same author

Three-dimensional accuracy of in-office aligner therapy: a retrospective comparison between planned and achieved tooth positions.

Journal of dentistry·2026
Same author

How stable are SLA-printed orthodontic models: a 6-month in vitro evaluation.

The Angle orthodontist·2026
Same author

Three-dimensional long-term assessment of soft tissue stability after orthognathic mandibular advancement for class II malocclusion correction.

Clinical oral investigations·2025
Same author

External root resorption evaluated by CBCT 3D models superimposition.

Dental press journal of orthodontics·2022
Same author

CAD/CAM TECHNOLOGY FOR DIGITAL INDIRECT BONDING

Journal of clinical orthodontics : JCO·2018

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 21, 2025

Designing CAD/CAM Surgical Guides for Maxillary Reconstruction Using an In-house Approach
08:01

Designing CAD/CAM Surgical Guides for Maxillary Reconstruction Using an In-house Approach

Published on: August 24, 2018

9.2K

Do low-cost 3-dimensional printers produce suitable dental models?

Ana Beatriz N Pereira1, Rhita C Almeida1, Carlo Marassi2

  • 1Department of Orthodontics, Rio de Janeiro State University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics : Official Publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, Its Constituent Societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics
|May 31, 2022
PubMed
Summary

Digital Light Processing (DLP) printers offer the best cost-benefit ratio for dental practices seeking accurate 3D printed models. These printers balance speed, cost, and accuracy effectively for small dental offices.

More Related Videos

Voxel Printing Anatomy: Design and Fabrication of Realistic, Presurgical Planning Models through Bitmap Printing
11:36

Voxel Printing Anatomy: Design and Fabrication of Realistic, Presurgical Planning Models through Bitmap Printing

Published on: February 9, 2022

2.9K
3D Printing of Preclinical X-ray Computed Tomographic Data Sets
11:06

3D Printing of Preclinical X-ray Computed Tomographic Data Sets

Published on: March 22, 2013

40.7K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Sep 21, 2025

Designing CAD/CAM Surgical Guides for Maxillary Reconstruction Using an In-house Approach
08:01

Designing CAD/CAM Surgical Guides for Maxillary Reconstruction Using an In-house Approach

Published on: August 24, 2018

9.2K
Voxel Printing Anatomy: Design and Fabrication of Realistic, Presurgical Planning Models through Bitmap Printing
11:36

Voxel Printing Anatomy: Design and Fabrication of Realistic, Presurgical Planning Models through Bitmap Printing

Published on: February 9, 2022

2.9K
3D Printing of Preclinical X-ray Computed Tomographic Data Sets
11:06

3D Printing of Preclinical X-ray Computed Tomographic Data Sets

Published on: March 22, 2013

40.7K

Area of Science:

  • Biomaterials Engineering
  • Dental Technology
  • Additive Manufacturing

Background:

  • Selecting 3D printers for dental models requires evaluating cost-benefit.
  • Low-cost 3D printing technologies like Digital Light Processing (DLP) and Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF) are increasingly accessible for dental applications.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess the accuracy, precision, cost, and time of DLP and FFF 3D printers for dental models.
  • To compare these low-cost methods against a clinically accepted standard (PolyJet).

Main Methods:

  • Five 3D printing methods were used: two DLP printers (Moonray, Anycubic), one FFF printer (UpMini 2), and a PolyJet printer (Objet Eden500V).
  • Virtual dental models from 5 patients were printed, with one model printed four times on each printer for consistency assessment.
  • Accuracy was evaluated using 3D model superimposition and linear measurements, with cost and time also calculated.

Main Results:

  • All tested printers yielded comparable results, though Moonray with Anycubic resin showed reduced accuracy, and Anycubic exhibited inconsistent vertical dimensions.
  • Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF) presented the lowest initial and printing costs but was significantly more time-intensive.
  • PolyJet printing was the fastest but most expensive method.

Conclusions:

  • Both DLP printers demonstrated a favorable balance of cost and performance, making them the most suitable option for small, independent dental offices.
  • Digital Light Processing (DLP) technology offers a practical and cost-effective solution for in-office 3D printing of dental models.