Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 4, 2025
Designing CAD/CAM Surgical Guides for Maxillary Reconstruction Using an In-house Approach
Published on: August 24, 2018
Trueness of maxillary complete dentures duplicated by using conventional and 3D printing techniques: A comparative in
Amany Mostafa Saad Farahat1, Omnia M Refai1, Yasmine Said Elsherbeeny1
1Lecturer, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Statement Of Problem:
Duplicating complete dentures and achieving accurately fitting prostheses poses a challenge. Conventional methods are often time-consuming and susceptible to human error. Advancements in digital technology for denture fabrication offer a promising alternative to conventional duplication techniques, but studies comparing the methods are lacking.
Purpose:
The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the trueness of duplicated complete dentures using 3-dimensional (3D) printing technology with that of dentures duplicated using the conventional method.
Material And Methods:
A typodont was used to construct a maxillary complete denture using the conventional method. The denture was scanned using a desktop scanner, and the standard tessellation language (STL) file was considered the reference file. Each denture was duplicated using 3 techniques (10 in each group). In the first group, the denture was duplicated using the conventional technique; in the second group, the denture was printed as a single unit (monolithic) from a tooth-colored resin, and the denture flange was then veneered with pink resin; in the third group, the denture base was printed separately from the pink resin, and the teeth were printed as a single unit using tooth-colored resin. The denture base and the teeth were co-related using a positioning device. The duplicate dentures in the 3 groups were scanned, and the STL files were imported into a surface-matching software program to evaluate their trueness. Statistical analysis was done using 1-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey post hoc test (α=.05).
Results:
A significant difference (P<.001) was found in the trueness of the 3 duplication techniques, with the highest overall deviation recorded in the conventional denture group (0.73 ±0.06 mm) and the least deviation recorded in the monolithic denture group (0.21 ±0.04 mm). Deviations in the canine, first molar, and maxillary tuberosities were the lowest in the monolithic denture group (0.13 ±0.01 mm), (0.11 ±0.03 mm), (0.27 ±0.05 mm), respectively.
Conclusions:
Using 3D printing technology for complete denture duplication has a promising outcome with the highest trueness reported with the monolithic denture. Comparative clinical studies are needed.
