ArticlePolymers2021
Manufacturing a First Upper Molar Dental Forceps Using Continuous Fiber Reinforcement (CFR) Additive Manufacturing Technology with Carbon-Reinforced Polyamide.
Article in Polymers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Imaging-Compatible Oral Retractor System for Transoral Robotic Surgery.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2024Article
- Comparison of Macintosh Laryngoscope, King VisionJournal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- The state of additive manufacturing in dental research - A systematic scoping review of 2012-2022.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Evaluation and Comparison of Traditional Plaster and Fiberglass Casts with 3D-Printed PLA and PLA-CaCOPolymers · 2022Article
- Collagenase Administration into Periodontal Ligament Reduces the Forces Required for Tooth Extraction in an Ex situ Porcine Jaw Model.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
3D printing is an emerging and disruptive technology, supporting the field of medicine over the past decades. In the recent years, the use of additive manufacturing (AM) has had a strong impact on everyday dental applications. Despite remarkable previous results from interdisciplinary research teams, there is no evidence or recommendation about the proper fabrication of handheld medical devices using desktop 3D printers. The aim of this study was to critically examine and compare the mechanical behavior of materials printed with FFF (fused filament fabrication) and CFR (continuous fiber reinforcement) additive manufacturing technologies, and to create and evaluate a massive and practically usable right upper molar forceps. Flexural and torsion fatigue tests, as well as Shore D measurements, were performed. The tensile strength was also measured in the case of the composite material. The flexural tests revealed the measured force values to have a linear correlation with the bending between the 10 mm (17.06 N at 5000th cycle) and 30 mm (37.99 N at 5000th cycle) deflection range. The findings were supported by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images. Based on the results of the mechanical and structural tests, a dental forceps was designed, 3D printed using CFR technology, and validated by five dentists using a Likert scale. In addition, the vertical force of extraction was measured using a unique molar tooth model, where the reference test was carried out using a standard metal right upper molar forceps. Surprisingly, the tests revealed there to be no significant differences between the standard (84.80 N ± 16.96 N) and 3D-printed devices (70.30 N ± 4.41 N) in terms of extraction force in the tested range. The results also highlighted that desktop CFR technology is potentially suitable for the production of handheld medical devices that have to withstand high forces and perform load-bearing functions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.