A critical evaluation of the material properties and clinical suitability of in‐house printed and commercial tooth replicas for endodontic training
Aim To assess the suitability of several 3D‐printed resins for the manufacturing of tooth replicas for endodontic training in comparison with commercially available replicas by analysing the properties of the materials and comparing them with real teeth during endodontic training. Methodology Tooth...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International endodontic journal 2020-10, Vol.53 (10), p.1446-1454 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1454 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 10 |
| container_start_page | 1446 |
| container_title | International endodontic journal |
| container_volume | 53 |
| creator | Reymus, M. Stawarczyk, B. Winkler, A. Ludwig, J. Kess, S. Krastl, G. Krug, R. |
| description | Aim
To assess the suitability of several 3D‐printed resins for the manufacturing of tooth replicas for endodontic training in comparison with commercially available replicas by analysing the properties of the materials and comparing them with real teeth during endodontic training.
Methodology
Tooth replicas were 3D‐printed using four resins (NextDent Model, NextDent C&B, V‐Print ee and Vero White Plus) and compared with two commercially available products (VDW and Smile Factory) as well as extracted human teeth. Martens hardness, indentation modulus and radiopacity were investigated on these tooth replicas. Experienced dentists evaluated the suitability of the replicas for endodontic training by comparing them with real teeth in terms of appearance, anatomy, radiopacity, similarity to dentine during access opening, canal gauging and canal instrumentation. Data were analysed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Mann–Whitney U‐test.
Results
The greatest hardness values were recorded for human dentine (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/iej.13361 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1111_iej_13361</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2441964178</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3881-50afe9d71c05cb9ea5ade781c87eb4c94350a59f0a02086820ca1948bb4b34633</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kb1uFDEURi0EIptAwQsgSzSkmMS_M3YZRQGCItFAPfJ47rBeeezF9oC24xFoeEGeBG8mUCDhxoXPd3SvP4ReUHJB67l0sLugnLf0EdpQ3sqGSU0fow2hgjdMKXmCTnPeEUIk4fQpOuGsZbzjcoN-XmGbXHHWeAxfjV9McTHgOOGyBTybAsnVp32Ke0jFQcYmjNh6F-4jeXHFDM67cjhmXPj1_cc2LhlqwoUC44rHeYZkj6ISY9niBHtf8xlPMWEIYxxjqDPgkkwVh8_P0JPJ-AzPH-4z9OnNzcfrd83dh7e311d3jeVK0UYSM4EeO2qJtIMGI80InaJWdTAIqwWvhNQTMYQR1SpGrKFaqGEQAxct52fo9eqt-31ZIJd-dtmC9yZA3aJngpFWdEzrir76B93FJYU6XaUE1a2gnarU-UrZFHNOMPX1H2aTDj0l_bGrvnbV33dV2ZcPxmWYYfxL_imnApcr8M15OPzf1N_evF-VvwFs66Dn</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2441964178</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A critical evaluation of the material properties and clinical suitability of in‐house printed and commercial tooth replicas for endodontic training</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Reymus, M. ; Stawarczyk, B. ; Winkler, A. ; Ludwig, J. ; Kess, S. ; Krastl, G. ; Krug, R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Reymus, M. ; Stawarczyk, B. ; Winkler, A. ; Ludwig, J. ; Kess, S. ; Krastl, G. ; Krug, R.</creatorcontrib><description>Aim
To assess the suitability of several 3D‐printed resins for the manufacturing of tooth replicas for endodontic training in comparison with commercially available replicas by analysing the properties of the materials and comparing them with real teeth during endodontic training.
Methodology
Tooth replicas were 3D‐printed using four resins (NextDent Model, NextDent C&B, V‐Print ee and Vero White Plus) and compared with two commercially available products (VDW and Smile Factory) as well as extracted human teeth. Martens hardness, indentation modulus and radiopacity were investigated on these tooth replicas. Experienced dentists evaluated the suitability of the replicas for endodontic training by comparing them with real teeth in terms of appearance, anatomy, radiopacity, similarity to dentine during access opening, canal gauging and canal instrumentation. Data were analysed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Mann–Whitney U‐test.
Results
The greatest hardness values were recorded for human dentine (P < 0.001), followed by V‐Print ee and the commercial tooth replica of Smile Factory. The greatest radiopacity was associated with VOC and dentine (P < 0.001) in comparison with the other materials tested. The appearance of the in‐house printed tooth replicas was subjectively evaluated by the dentists as being more realistic than the commercially available products. No differences between the replicas was detected during mechanical instrumentation of root canals.
Conclusion
None of the tooth replicas were able to simulate human dentine from the perspectives evaluated. V‐Print ee had radiopacity comparable with dentine, but its hardness was not comparable with dentine.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0143-2885</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2591</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/iej.13361</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32623735</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>3-D technology ; 3D Printing ; dental education ; Dentistry ; Dentists ; Humans ; Medical education ; replica ; Resins ; Root canals ; Teeth ; Tooth ; Tooth Extraction ; undergraduate training</subject><ispartof>International endodontic journal, 2020-10, Vol.53 (10), p.1446-1454</ispartof><rights>2020 The Authors. published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Endodontic Society</rights><rights>2020 The Authors. International Endodontic Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Endodontic Society.</rights><rights>2020. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3881-50afe9d71c05cb9ea5ade781c87eb4c94350a59f0a02086820ca1948bb4b34633</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3881-50afe9d71c05cb9ea5ade781c87eb4c94350a59f0a02086820ca1948bb4b34633</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9040-5623 ; 0000-0002-9402-8121</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fiej.13361$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fiej.13361$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32623735$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Reymus, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stawarczyk, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Winkler, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ludwig, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kess, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krastl, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krug, R.</creatorcontrib><title>A critical evaluation of the material properties and clinical suitability of in‐house printed and commercial tooth replicas for endodontic training</title><title>International endodontic journal</title><addtitle>Int Endod J</addtitle><description>Aim
To assess the suitability of several 3D‐printed resins for the manufacturing of tooth replicas for endodontic training in comparison with commercially available replicas by analysing the properties of the materials and comparing them with real teeth during endodontic training.
Methodology
Tooth replicas were 3D‐printed using four resins (NextDent Model, NextDent C&B, V‐Print ee and Vero White Plus) and compared with two commercially available products (VDW and Smile Factory) as well as extracted human teeth. Martens hardness, indentation modulus and radiopacity were investigated on these tooth replicas. Experienced dentists evaluated the suitability of the replicas for endodontic training by comparing them with real teeth in terms of appearance, anatomy, radiopacity, similarity to dentine during access opening, canal gauging and canal instrumentation. Data were analysed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Mann–Whitney U‐test.
Results
The greatest hardness values were recorded for human dentine (P < 0.001), followed by V‐Print ee and the commercial tooth replica of Smile Factory. The greatest radiopacity was associated with VOC and dentine (P < 0.001) in comparison with the other materials tested. The appearance of the in‐house printed tooth replicas was subjectively evaluated by the dentists as being more realistic than the commercially available products. No differences between the replicas was detected during mechanical instrumentation of root canals.
Conclusion
None of the tooth replicas were able to simulate human dentine from the perspectives evaluated. V‐Print ee had radiopacity comparable with dentine, but its hardness was not comparable with dentine.</description><subject>3-D technology</subject><subject>3D Printing</subject><subject>dental education</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Dentists</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical education</subject><subject>replica</subject><subject>Resins</subject><subject>Root canals</subject><subject>Teeth</subject><subject>Tooth</subject><subject>Tooth Extraction</subject><subject>undergraduate training</subject><issn>0143-2885</issn><issn>1365-2591</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kb1uFDEURi0EIptAwQsgSzSkmMS_M3YZRQGCItFAPfJ47rBeeezF9oC24xFoeEGeBG8mUCDhxoXPd3SvP4ReUHJB67l0sLugnLf0EdpQ3sqGSU0fow2hgjdMKXmCTnPeEUIk4fQpOuGsZbzjcoN-XmGbXHHWeAxfjV9McTHgOOGyBTybAsnVp32Ke0jFQcYmjNh6F-4jeXHFDM67cjhmXPj1_cc2LhlqwoUC44rHeYZkj6ISY9niBHtf8xlPMWEIYxxjqDPgkkwVh8_P0JPJ-AzPH-4z9OnNzcfrd83dh7e311d3jeVK0UYSM4EeO2qJtIMGI80InaJWdTAIqwWvhNQTMYQR1SpGrKFaqGEQAxct52fo9eqt-31ZIJd-dtmC9yZA3aJngpFWdEzrir76B93FJYU6XaUE1a2gnarU-UrZFHNOMPX1H2aTDj0l_bGrvnbV33dV2ZcPxmWYYfxL_imnApcr8M15OPzf1N_evF-VvwFs66Dn</recordid><startdate>202010</startdate><enddate>202010</enddate><creator>Reymus, M.</creator><creator>Stawarczyk, B.</creator><creator>Winkler, A.</creator><creator>Ludwig, J.</creator><creator>Kess, S.</creator><creator>Krastl, G.</creator><creator>Krug, R.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9040-5623</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9402-8121</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202010</creationdate><title>A critical evaluation of the material properties and clinical suitability of in‐house printed and commercial tooth replicas for endodontic training</title><author>Reymus, M. ; Stawarczyk, B. ; Winkler, A. ; Ludwig, J. ; Kess, S. ; Krastl, G. ; Krug, R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3881-50afe9d71c05cb9ea5ade781c87eb4c94350a59f0a02086820ca1948bb4b34633</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>3-D technology</topic><topic>3D Printing</topic><topic>dental education</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Dentists</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical education</topic><topic>replica</topic><topic>Resins</topic><topic>Root canals</topic><topic>Teeth</topic><topic>Tooth</topic><topic>Tooth Extraction</topic><topic>undergraduate training</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Reymus, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stawarczyk, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Winkler, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ludwig, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kess, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krastl, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krug, R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International endodontic journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Reymus, M.</au><au>Stawarczyk, B.</au><au>Winkler, A.</au><au>Ludwig, J.</au><au>Kess, S.</au><au>Krastl, G.</au><au>Krug, R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A critical evaluation of the material properties and clinical suitability of in‐house printed and commercial tooth replicas for endodontic training</atitle><jtitle>International endodontic journal</jtitle><addtitle>Int Endod J</addtitle><date>2020-10</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>53</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1446</spage><epage>1454</epage><pages>1446-1454</pages><issn>0143-2885</issn><eissn>1365-2591</eissn><abstract>Aim
To assess the suitability of several 3D‐printed resins for the manufacturing of tooth replicas for endodontic training in comparison with commercially available replicas by analysing the properties of the materials and comparing them with real teeth during endodontic training.
Methodology
Tooth replicas were 3D‐printed using four resins (NextDent Model, NextDent C&B, V‐Print ee and Vero White Plus) and compared with two commercially available products (VDW and Smile Factory) as well as extracted human teeth. Martens hardness, indentation modulus and radiopacity were investigated on these tooth replicas. Experienced dentists evaluated the suitability of the replicas for endodontic training by comparing them with real teeth in terms of appearance, anatomy, radiopacity, similarity to dentine during access opening, canal gauging and canal instrumentation. Data were analysed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Mann–Whitney U‐test.
Results
The greatest hardness values were recorded for human dentine (P < 0.001), followed by V‐Print ee and the commercial tooth replica of Smile Factory. The greatest radiopacity was associated with VOC and dentine (P < 0.001) in comparison with the other materials tested. The appearance of the in‐house printed tooth replicas was subjectively evaluated by the dentists as being more realistic than the commercially available products. No differences between the replicas was detected during mechanical instrumentation of root canals.
Conclusion
None of the tooth replicas were able to simulate human dentine from the perspectives evaluated. V‐Print ee had radiopacity comparable with dentine, but its hardness was not comparable with dentine.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>32623735</pmid><doi>10.1111/iej.13361</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9040-5623</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9402-8121</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0143-2885 |
| ispartof | International endodontic journal, 2020-10, Vol.53 (10), p.1446-1454 |
| issn | 0143-2885 1365-2591 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1111_iej_13361 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library All Journals |
| subjects | 3-D technology 3D Printing dental education Dentistry Dentists Humans Medical education replica Resins Root canals Teeth Tooth Tooth Extraction undergraduate training |
| title | A critical evaluation of the material properties and clinical suitability of in‐house printed and commercial tooth replicas for endodontic training |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T02%3A19%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20critical%20evaluation%20of%20the%20material%20properties%20and%20clinical%20suitability%20of%20in%E2%80%90house%20printed%20and%20commercial%20tooth%20replicas%20for%20endodontic%20training&rft.jtitle=International%20endodontic%20journal&rft.au=Reymus,%20M.&rft.date=2020-10&rft.volume=53&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1446&rft.epage=1454&rft.pages=1446-1454&rft.issn=0143-2885&rft.eissn=1365-2591&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/iej.13361&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2441964178%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2441964178&rft_id=info:pmid/32623735&rfr_iscdi=true |