Scholarlink

<p>The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different Angle printing on the model on the printing platform and whether it affects the later transfer accuracy. Ten bracket transfer models were printed on the platform of the 3D printer in four ways: 0° without support rod, 0°, 45° and 90° with support rod. Transfer guide plates for transfer brackets were made using PVS. The linear and angular discrepancies were determined digitally by measuring six different dimensions. The best performance was achieved at 90° with a support bar, with mesiogingival wing center point gap and diogingival wing center point gap of 0.169 and 0.176, respectively (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.05). The linear deviation of groups A and B in the vertical direction was highest (0.285 (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.001) and 0.283 (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.001), respectively) when the transfer guide plate was made by PVS for the transfer bracket, followed by the proximal and distal direction. The best performance was achieved in the Orovestibular. The printing angle of the 3D indirect bonding slot transfer model on the printing platform significantly impacts the transfer accuracy, with the accuracy of the 45° and 90° bracket models having the least impact. A minimum transfer error of 90° since 90° 3D printed bracket transfer models with support rods have the best reliability.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Influence of 3D printing angles on the accuracy of indirect adhesion transfer models: an in vitro study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月15日

查看全文
  • Fangyong Zhu,
  • Liuping Yu,
  • Meichun Hu,
  • Zhuang Ding,
  • Hong Ma,
  • Xingmei Feng,
  • Yufeng Gao,
  • Yannan Cao

摘要

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different Angle printing on the model on the printing platform and whether it affects the later transfer accuracy. Ten bracket transfer models were printed on the platform of the 3D printer in four ways: 0° without support rod, 0°, 45° and 90° with support rod. Transfer guide plates for transfer brackets were made using PVS. The linear and angular discrepancies were determined digitally by measuring six different dimensions. The best performance was achieved at 90° with a support bar, with mesiogingival wing center point gap and diogingival wing center point gap of 0.169 and 0.176, respectively (P < 0.05). The linear deviation of groups A and B in the vertical direction was highest (0.285 (P < 0.001) and 0.283 (P < 0.001), respectively) when the transfer guide plate was made by PVS for the transfer bracket, followed by the proximal and distal direction. The best performance was achieved in the Orovestibular. The printing angle of the 3D indirect bonding slot transfer model on the printing platform significantly impacts the transfer accuracy, with the accuracy of the 45° and 90° bracket models having the least impact. A minimum transfer error of 90° since 90° 3D printed bracket transfer models with support rods have the best reliability.