华西口腔医学杂志

• 专栏论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

应用3D打印熔融沉积技术制作个性化种植修复体的精确度研究

王宁1 李杰1 王晓龙2 刘刚2,3 刘斌1   

  1. 1.兰州大学口腔医学院;2.中国科学院兰州化学物理研究所;3.兰州大学信息科学与工程学院,兰州 730000
  • 收稿日期:2015-04-05 修回日期:2015-07-12 出版日期:2015-10-01 发布日期:2015-10-01
  • 通讯作者: 刘斌,教授,博士,E-mail:liubkq@lzu.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:王宁,硕士,E-mail:ning2369@qq.com
  • 基金资助:

    中国科学院西部之光人才培养计划(2014);国家自然科学基金资助项目(51171202);甘肃省自然科学基金资助项目(145RJZA126)

3D printing personalized implant manufactured via fused deposition modeling: an accuracy research

Wang Ning1, Li Jie1, Wang Xiaolong2, Liu Gang2,3, Liu Bin1.   

  1. 1. School of Stomatology, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China; 2. Lanzhou
    Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China; 3. School of Information Science and Engineering, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China
  • Received:2015-04-05 Revised:2015-07-12 Online:2015-10-01 Published:2015-10-01

摘要:

目的 应用3D打印熔融沉积(FDM)技术制作个性化种植修复体,评估其与天然牙的误差。方法 通过Mimics 15.0软件提取锥形束CT(CBCT)扫描的6颗因正畸减数而需拔除牙(体内牙)的数据模型并制作个性化种植修复体。在相同参数下重新扫描拔除后的正畸减数牙(体外牙)及个性化种植修复体获取数据模型,利用Geomagicstudio软件比较3种数据模型之间的三维偏差大小。结果 个性化种植修复体与体内牙数据模型整体模型间的高低区域偏差的平均值为0.19 mm和-0.16 mm,体内牙与体外牙数据模型整体模型间的高低区域偏差的平均值为0.14 mm和-0.07 mm;两组数据经独立样本t检验,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 1)应用3D打印FDM技术制作的个性化种植修复体精密度良好。2)基于相同参数CBCT扫描数据获得的体内牙与体外牙的数据模型仍存在一定误差。

关键词: 3D打印技术, 熔融沉积技术, 个性化种植修复体, 数据模型

Abstract:

Objective The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of personalized implant fabricated via 3D
printing and fused deposition modeling technique (FDM) and to compare the results with a real tooth. Methods Six prepared extracted orthodontic teeth (in vivo) were scanned via cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) to obtain 3D data and to build the data models by using Mimics 15.0 software. The extracted orthodontic teeth (in vitro) and the personalized implants designed via 3D printing and FDM were scanned via CBCT to obtain data and to build the data models at the same parameters. The 3D deviations were compared among the in vivo teeth data models, in vitro teeth data models, and printing personalized implant data models by using the Geomagic studio software. Results The average deviations of high and low areas between date models of in vivo teeth and personalized implants were 0.19 mm and -0.16 mm, respectively, and the average deviations between in vitro and in vivo teeth were 0.14 mm and -0.07 mm, respectively. The independent t test showed that no statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion 1) The personalized dental implants were manufactured via 3D printing and FDM with a high degree of precision. 2) Errors between the data models of in vitro and in vivo teeth were observed at the same CBCT parameters.

Key words: 3D printing technique, fused deposition modeling technique, personalized dental implant, date model