Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 27, 2025

Designing CAD/CAM Surgical Guides for Maxillary Reconstruction Using an In-house Approach
Published on: August 24, 2018
Effect of Model Body Type and Print Angle on the Accuracy of 3D-Printed Orthodontic Models
Stefan Lohfeld1, Bryndon Belnap1,2, Jean-Marc Retrouvey2
1Department of Oral and Craniofacial Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, MO 64108, USA.
Abstract:
The assortment of low-cost 3D printers for "in-practice" use, e.g., for clear aligner therapies, is ever increasing. To address concerns about the accuracy of orthodontic models produced on such printers when cost-efficient modes of 3D printing are employed, this study examined the effect of print model body type and print angulation on accuracy. Six printing-configuration groups were included: two model types (solid or hollow shell) combined with three print angles (0°, 70°, or 90°) with 10 models/group; all models were printed with 100 µm layer thickness using a digital light processing-based three-dimensional printer. Eleven selected structures and distances were measured on the printed models with a digital microscope and compared to the same measures on a digitized master model. The clinically acceptable range was set at ±0.25 mm difference from the master model for single tooth measurements (intra-tooth) and ±0.5 mm for cross-arch measurements (inter-tooth). For individual measurements across all models, 98% fell within clinical acceptability. For mean measurements within each model group, only canine height for the shell-0° model had a mean difference (-0.26 mm ± 0.03) outside the clinically acceptable range for intra-tooth measurements. Standard deviations for all intra-tooth measurements were within 0.07 mm. While none of the mean inter-tooth measurements exceeded the acceptability range, the standard deviations were larger (0.04 to 0.30 mm). The accuracy of the orthodontic models for clear aligner therapies was not impacted beyond the clinically acceptable range when altering model body type and print angulation to improve efficiency of 3D printing. These findings suggest greater flexibility of the practitioner to alter print settings to address time and cost efficiency in various clinical scenarios and still maintain clinically acceptable model accuracy.

