ArticleHeliyon2024
Trueness of five different 3D printing systems including budget- and professional-grade printers: An In vitro study.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Are There Clinical Differences Between 3D-Printed and Milled Complete Dentures? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.International dental journal · 2025Pooled it
- Robot-assisted Computer-Implant surgery : A comprehensive review of system architecture, clinical accuracy, and emerging technologies.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Dimensional Accuracy and Short-Term Stability of Orthodontic Resin-Printed Models: A Closed Dental System Compared with Commercial Desktop Workflows.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Enhancing Implant Prosthodontics: In Vitro Accuracy of Coded Healing Abutments on the Edentulous Lower Jaw.Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2025Article
- Effective and new technologies in kidney tissue engineering.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Problem: Several types of 3D printers with different techniques and prices are available on the market. However, results in the literature are inconsistent, and there is no comprehensive agreement on the accuracy of 3D printers of different price categories for dental applications. Aim: This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of five different 3D printing systems, including a comparison of budget- and higher-end 3D printing systems, according to a standardized production and evaluation protocol. Material and methods: A maxillary reference model with prepared teeth was created using 16 half-ball markers with a diameter of 1 mm to facilitate measurements. A reference file was fabricated using five different 3D printers. The printed models were scanned and superimposed onto the original standard tesselation language (.stl) file, and digital measurements were performed to assess the 3-dimensional and linear deviations between the reference and test models. Results: After examining the entire surface of the models, we found that 3D printers using Fused filament fabrication (FFF) technology -120.2 (20.3) μm create models with high trueness but high distortion. Distortions along the z-axis were found to be the highest with the stereolithography (SLA)-type 3D printer at -153.7 (38.7) μm. For the 4-unit FPD, we found 201.9 (41.8) μm deviation with the digital light processing (DLP) printer. The largest deviation (-265.1 (55.4) μm) between the second molars was observed for the DLP printer. Between the incisor and the second molar, the best results were produced by the FFF printer with -30.5 (76.7) μm. Conclusion: Budget-friendly 3D printers are comparable to professional-grade printers in terms of precision. In general, the cost of a printing system is not a reliable indicator of its level of accuracy.
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.