Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 15, 2026
Treatment of Facial Deformities using 3D Planning and Printing of Patient-Specific Implants
Published on: May 23, 2020
From blueprints to reality: A narrative review of evidence-based 3D printers in dentistry
Sohaib Shujaat1, Reinhilde Jacobs2
1King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; OMFS-IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven & Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Objective:
To compile a catalog of three-dimensional (3D) additive manufacturing systems used in dentistry and describe their technologies, applications, and maturity of use.
Methods:
PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched through January 2025. Reference lists were screened to capture additional devices. Commercial printers were included if peer-reviewed dental applications were reported. Where technical details were missing, manufacturer documentation such as manuals and datasheets was consulted. Extracted variables included manufacturer, country of origin, model, printing technology, application domain, and practice setting.
Results:
A total of 372 printers from 115 manufacturers across 26 countries were identified. Most originated from China, the United States, and Germany. Vat polymerization systems, particularly stereolithography and digital light processing, were most frequently described for surgical guides, diagnostic models, and provisional restorations. Powder-bed fusion systems, including selective laser melting and direct metal laser sintering, were commonly reported for cobalt chromium and titanium frameworks and patient-specific implants.
Conclusions:
This review compiled a catalog of dental 3D printers, consolidating technologies and reported applications. By linking systems to their demonstrated uses, it could assist clinicians and researchers in selecting technologies suited to specific clinical needs and workflows. The synthesis further suggested that factors such as accuracy, reliability, and regulatory compliance should be prioritized in evaluation, as these may help ensure safer integration and more reproducible outcomes.
Clinical Significance:
The catalog provides a practical reference for clinicians considering 3D printing in practice. It emphasizes that vat polymerization systems can be reliably applied for guides and models, while provisional restorations may be adopted with caution due to limited long-term data. More complex applications, such as definitive prostheses, direct aligners, and metal additive frameworks, should be approached selectively until supported by stronger clinical evidence and regulatory validation of printers.
