ArticleBMC oral health2026
Do implant angulation and print orientation compromise masked stereolithography apparatus printer model accuracy? an in-vitro study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of implant angle and print orientation on the accuracy of printed implant models fabricated with a masked stereolithography (mSLA) printer. MATERIALS AND
methodsThree digital reference models were designed in a design software (Meshmixer) with implants positioned at 0°, 10°, and 20°. Each reference design was printed at three different orientations (0°, 45°, and 90°; n = 10) using an mSLA printer (Anycubic Photon M3 Max). Printed models were scanned using a desktop scanner (E4, 3Shape) and analyzed for linear and angular accuracy using Geomagic Control X. Statistical evaluation was performed using two-way ANOVA with Tukey's HSD or Kruskal-Wallis with Dunn-Bonferroni correction (p < 0.05).
resultsImplant angulation and print orientation had a significant effect on linear and angular trueness of implant models (p < 0.05). The smallest linear deviations were obtained at 0° implant angulation and 90° print orientation. The lowest angular deviations were found at 0° print orientation. Two-way interaction was significant for linear trueness (p < 0.001) but not for angular trueness (p = 0.063). The print orientation affected both linear and angular precision. The lowest precision values were observed at 90° compared with 0° and 45° print orientations (p < 0.05).
conclusionThe findings suggest that both implant angulation and print orientation affect the accuracy of mSLA-printed implant models. Short-span models with minimal implant angulation can be printed at 90° print orientation.
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.