Influence of 3D printing angles on the accuracy of indirect adhesion transfer models: an in vitro study
Abstract 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...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2025-03-01
|
| Series: | Scientific Reports |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-90328-1 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849772350766055424 |
|---|---|
| author | Fangyong Zhu Liuping Yu Meichun Hu Zhuang Ding Hong Ma Xingmei Feng Yufeng Gao Yannan Cao |
| author_facet | Fangyong Zhu Liuping Yu Meichun Hu Zhuang Ding Hong Ma Xingmei Feng Yufeng Gao Yannan Cao |
| author_sort | Fangyong Zhu |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract 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. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-4a7b803b71834d88ae0db22fcd436e46 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2045-2322 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-03-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Scientific Reports |
| spelling | doaj-art-4a7b803b71834d88ae0db22fcd436e462025-08-20T03:02:21ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222025-03-0115111210.1038/s41598-025-90328-1Influence of 3D printing angles on the accuracy of indirect adhesion transfer models: an in vitro studyFangyong Zhu0Liuping Yu1Meichun Hu2Zhuang Ding3Hong Ma4Xingmei Feng5Yufeng Gao6Yannan Cao7Department of Stomatology, Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan UniversityWuxi Medical College, Jiangnan UniversityWuxi Medical College, Jiangnan UniversityDepartment of Stomatology, Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan UniversityDepartment of Stomatology, Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan UniversityDepartment of Stomatology, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong UniversityJiangsu Wuxi People’s HospitalDepartment of Stomatology, Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan UniversityAbstract 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.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-90328-13D printingIndirect bondingDigital bondingCAD/CAMPolyvinyl siloxane |
| spellingShingle | Fangyong Zhu Liuping Yu Meichun Hu Zhuang Ding Hong Ma Xingmei Feng Yufeng Gao Yannan Cao Influence of 3D printing angles on the accuracy of indirect adhesion transfer models: an in vitro study Scientific Reports 3D printing Indirect bonding Digital bonding CAD/CAM Polyvinyl siloxane |
| title | Influence of 3D printing angles on the accuracy of indirect adhesion transfer models: an in vitro study |
| title_full | Influence of 3D printing angles on the accuracy of indirect adhesion transfer models: an in vitro study |
| title_fullStr | Influence of 3D printing angles on the accuracy of indirect adhesion transfer models: an in vitro study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Influence of 3D printing angles on the accuracy of indirect adhesion transfer models: an in vitro study |
| title_short | Influence of 3D printing angles on the accuracy of indirect adhesion transfer models: an in vitro study |
| title_sort | influence of 3d printing angles on the accuracy of indirect adhesion transfer models an in vitro study |
| topic | 3D printing Indirect bonding Digital bonding CAD/CAM Polyvinyl siloxane |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-90328-1 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fangyongzhu influenceof3dprintinganglesontheaccuracyofindirectadhesiontransfermodelsaninvitrostudy AT liupingyu influenceof3dprintinganglesontheaccuracyofindirectadhesiontransfermodelsaninvitrostudy AT meichunhu influenceof3dprintinganglesontheaccuracyofindirectadhesiontransfermodelsaninvitrostudy AT zhuangding influenceof3dprintinganglesontheaccuracyofindirectadhesiontransfermodelsaninvitrostudy AT hongma influenceof3dprintinganglesontheaccuracyofindirectadhesiontransfermodelsaninvitrostudy AT xingmeifeng influenceof3dprintinganglesontheaccuracyofindirectadhesiontransfermodelsaninvitrostudy AT yufenggao influenceof3dprintinganglesontheaccuracyofindirectadhesiontransfermodelsaninvitrostudy AT yannancao influenceof3dprintinganglesontheaccuracyofindirectadhesiontransfermodelsaninvitrostudy |