Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41590910›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging2026

A Slicer-Independent Framework for Measuring G-Code Accuracy in Medical 3D Printing.

Michel Beyer, Alexandru Burde, Andreas E Roser, Maximiliane Beyer, Sead Abazi, Florian M Thieringer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Michel BeyerDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Basel, 4031 Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0009-0002-5377-1530
Alexandru BurdeDepartment of Dental Technology, Faculty of Nursing and Health Sciences, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-2995-9878
Andreas E RoserDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Basel, 4031 Basel, Switzerland.
Maximiliane BeyerFaculty of Medicine, University of Zürich, 8032 Zürich, Switzerland.
Sead AbaziDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Basel, 4031 Basel, Switzerland.
Florian M ThieringerDepartment of Oral and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Basel, 4031 Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-3035-9308

Funding

Werner Siemens Foundation Miracle II
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In medical 3D printing, accuracy is critical for fabricating patient-specific implants and anatomical models. Although printer performance has been widely examined, the influence of slicing software on geometric fidelity is less frequently quantified. The slicing step, which converts STL files into printer-readable G-code, may introduce deviations that affect the final printed object. To quantify slicer-induced G-code deviations by comparing G-code-derived geometries with their reference STL modelsTwenty mandibular models were processed using five slicers (PrusaSlicer (version 2.9.1.), Cura (version 5.2.2.), Simplify3D (version 4.1.2.), Slic3r (version 1.3.0.) and Fusion 360 (version 2.0.19725)). A custom Python workflow converted the G-code into point clouds and reconstructed STL meshes through XY and Z corrections, marching cubes surface extraction, and volumetric extrusion. A calibration object enabled coordinate normalization across slicers. Accuracy was assessed using Mean Surface Distance (MSD), Root Mean Square (RMS) deviation, and Volume Difference. MSD ranged from 0.071 to 0.095 mm, and RMS deviation from 0.084 to 0.113 mm, depending on the slicer. Volumetric differences were slicer-dependent. PrusaSlicer yielded the highest surface accuracy; Simplify3D and Slic3r showed best repeatability. Fusion 360 produced the largest deviations. The slicers introduced geometric deviations below 0.1 mm that represent a substantial proportion of the overall error in the FDM workflow.

Indexed as

3D printingCAD/CAMG-codeimage processingvolume rendering

Identifiers

PMID41590910
PMCPMC12843157

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.