Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34301029›Full record

ArticlePolymers2021

Estimating the Accuracy of Mandible Anatomical Models Manufactured Using Material Extrusion Methods.

Paweł Turek, Grzegorz Budzik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polymers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Paweł TurekFaculty of Mechanical Engineering and Aeronautics, Rzeszów University of Technology, 35-959 Rzeszów, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-5926-4815
Grzegorz BudzikFaculty of Mechanical Engineering and Aeronautics, Rzeszów University of Technology, 35-959 Rzeszów, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-3598-2860

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of new solutions in craniofacial surgery brings the need to increase the accuracy of 3D printing models. The accuracy of the manufactured models is most often verified using optical coordinate measuring systems. However, so far, no decision has been taken regarding which type of system would allow for a reliable estimation of the geometrical accuracy of the anatomical models. Three types of optical measurement systems (Atos III Triple Scan, articulated arm (MCA-II) with a laser head (MMD × 100), and Benchtop CT160Xi) were used to verify the accuracy of 12 polymer anatomical models of the left side of the mandible. The models were manufactured using fused deposition modeling (FDM), melted and extruded modeling (MEM), and fused filament fabrication (FFF) techniques. The obtained results indicate that the Atos III Triple Scan allows for the most accurate estimation of errors in model manufacturing. Using the FDM technique obtained the best accuracy in models manufactured (0.008 ± 0.118 mm for ABS0-M30 and 0.016 ± 0.178 mm for PC-10 material). A very similar value of the standard deviation of PLA and PET material was observed (about 0.180 mm). The worst results were observed in the MEM technique (0.012 mm ± 0.308 mm). The knowledge regarding the precisely evaluated errors in manufactured models within the mandibular area will help in the controlled preparation of templates regarding the expected accuracy of surgical operations.

Indexed as

accuracyadditive manufacturingmandiblematerial extrusion methodsoptical systemspolymer models

Identifiers

PMID34301029
PMCPMC8309312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.