A workflow for fabricating a hollow obturator by using 3D digital technologies

Koyama, Shihoko; Kato, Hiroaki; Harata, Takayuki; Sasaki, Keiichi

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.020

Cited by 16 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Depending on the size of the defect, the PMMA obturators may become heavy. The weight can be reduced by using either a hollow design [ 197 , 198 , 199 ] or silicon core [ 200 , 201 ].…”

Section: Applications Of Pmmamentioning

confidence: 99%

Prosthodontic Applications of Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA): An Update

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A wide range of polymers are commonly used for various applications in prosthodontics. Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) is commonly used for prosthetic dental applications, including the fabrication of artificial teeth, denture bases, dentures, obturators, orthodontic retainers, temporary or provisional crowns, and for the repair of dental prostheses. Additional dental applications of PMMA include occlusal splints, printed or milled casts, dies for treatment planning, and the embedding of tooth specimens for research purposes. The unique properties of PMMA, such as its low density, aesthetics, cost-effectiveness, ease of manipulation, and tailorable physical and mechanical properties, make it a suitable and popular biomaterial for these dental applications. To further improve the properties (thermal properties, water sorption, solubility, impact strength, flexural strength) of PMMA, several chemical modifications and mechanical reinforcement techniques using various types of fibers, nanoparticles, and nanotubes have been reported recently. The present article comprehensively reviews various aspects and properties of PMMA biomaterials, mainly for prosthodontic applications. In addition, recent updates and modifications to enhance the physical and mechanical properties of PMMA are also discussed.

show abstract

“…Depending on the size of the defect, the PMMA obturators may become heavy. The weight can be reduced by using either a hollow design [ 197 , 198 , 199 ] or silicon core [ 200 , 201 ].…”

Section: Applications Of Pmmamentioning

confidence: 99%

Prosthodontic Applications of Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA): An Update

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The advantages of 3D printed obturator prosthesis include lowered laboratory cost and increased bond strength between the obturator portion and denture base portion with a seamless adhesion. 14,25 Results from this study showed that the Injection Molding group (0.139 ± 0.049 mm) had significantly lower RMS than all other groups, and showed the best intaglio surface trueness of obturator prosthesis bases. Compression Molding (0.269 ± 0.057 mm), Cara Print 3D-Printer (0.409 ± 0.270 mm), and Carbon 3D-Printer (0.291 ± 0.082 mm) groups showed similar intaglio surface trueness outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…3D printing also made the manufacturing process of hollow obturator prosthesis significantly easier. 25 It is more time-consuming and technique-sensitive when using the conventional compression molding and milling processes to fabricate a hollow obturator prosthesis. Different portions of prosthesis need to be fabricated separately and joined together subsequently with auto-polymerizing resin.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The porosity and polymerization shrinkage may compromise the bond between the two parts. 25 Based on the International Organization for Standardization 5725-1, the accuracy of a measurement includes trueness and precision. The trueness is defined as the closeness of agreement between the arithmetic mean of measurement results and the true or accepted reference value, and the precision is defined as the closeness of agreement between measurement results.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Trueness of Obturator Prosthesis Base Manufactured by Conventional and 3D Printing Techniques

Alfaraj

Yang

Levon

et al. 2021

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To compare the intaglio surface trueness of obturator prosthesis bases manufactured by traditional compression molding, injection molding, and 3D printing techniques. Materials and Methods: A complete edentulous master cast with Aramany Class I maxillary defect was selected for this in vitro study. Four study groups (n = 10/group) were included in this study, Group A: Compression Molding, Group B: Injection Molding, and Group C: Cara Print 3D DLP Printer, and Group D: Carbon 3D DLS Printer. All obturator prostheses' intaglio surfaces were scanned with a laboratory scanner (E4; 3Shape Inc, New Providence, NJ) and the dimensional differences between study samples and their corresponding casts were calculated as the root mean square (measured in mm, absolute value) using a surface matching software (Geomagic design X; 3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC). One-way Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Fisher's least significant difference (LSD) test were used to compare groups differences in RMS (α = 0.05). Results: There was a significant effect of manufacturing technique on the RMS values for the 4 conditions [F(3,36) = 5.743, p = 0.003]. Injection Molding (0.070 mm) and Compression Molding groups (0.076 mm) had a lower interquartile range, and the Cara Print 3D-Printer group (0.427 mm) and Carbon 3D-Printer (0.149 mm) groups had a higher interquartile range. The Injection Molding group showed the best and uniform surface matching with the most area in green in the color maps. The Injection Molding group (0.139 ± 0.049 mm) had significantly lower RMS than all other groups (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Compression Molding (0.269 ± 0.057 mm), Cara Print 3D-Printer (0.409 ± 0.270 mm), and Carbon 3D-Printer (0.291 ± 0.082 mm) groups were not significantly different from each other (Compression Molding versus Carbon 3D-Printer, p = 0.59; Compression Molding versus Cara Print 3D-Printer, p = 0.25; Cara Print 3D-Printer versus Carbon 3D-Printer, p = 0.40). Conclusion:Obturator prosthesis bases manufactured with injection molding technique showed better intaglio surface trueness than ones made by the compression molding technique and 3D printers. Although obturator prosthesis bases manufactured from different 3D printers showed similar trueness, a DLP 3D printer produced less consistent outcome than a DLS 3D printer.

show abstract

“…The data available from the existing literature revealed the following acquisition modalities: CT scans [26,29,31,36,39,41,43,46,54,60,67,71], MRIs, CBCTs (for maxillary obturators) [22,24], structured light scanners [19][20][21]23,58], laser scanners [37,49,51,56,57,[62][63][64]68,70], light intensity scanners [30], facial scanners, intraoral scanners (IOSs) [3,18,25,27,32,44,53], desktop scanners [34,66], 3D photogrammetry [28,40,52,55,59,69], the monoscopic photogrammetry technique with a mobile phone [15] or two (or more) of the following combined registration modalities: CT and a facial scanner [61], CT an...…”

Section: Anatomic Data Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital Workflow in Maxillofacial Prosthodontics—An Update on Defect Data Acquisition, Editing and Design Using Open-Source and Commercial Available Software

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: A maxillofacial prosthesis, an alternative to surgery for the rehabilitation of patients with facial disabilities (congenital or acquired due to malignant disease or trauma), are meant to replace parts of the face or missing areas of bone and soft tissue and restore oral functions such as swallowing, speech and chewing, with the main goal being to improve the quality of life of the patients. The conventional procedures for maxillofacial prosthesis manufacturing involve several complex steps, are very traumatic for the patient and rely on the skills of the maxillofacial team. Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing have opened a new approach to the fabrication of maxillofacial prostheses. Our review aimed to perform an update on the digital design of a maxillofacial prosthesis, emphasizing the available methods of data acquisition for the extraoral, intraoral and complex defects in the maxillofacial region and assessing the software used for data processing and part design. Methods: A search in the PubMed and Scopus databases was done using the predefined MeSH terms. Results: Partially and complete digital workflows were successfully applied for extraoral and intraoral prosthesis manufacturing. Conclusions: To date, the software and interface used to process and design maxillofacial prostheses are expensive, not typical for this purpose and accessible only to very skilled dental professionals or to computer-aided design (CAD) engineers. As the demand for a digital approach to maxillofacial rehabilitation increases, more support from the software designer or manufacturer will be necessary to create user-friendly and accessible modules similar to those used in dental laboratories.

show abstract

A workflow for fabricating a hollow obturator by using 3D digital technologies

Cited by 16 publications

References 19 publications

Prosthodontic Applications of Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA): An Update

Prosthodontic Applications of Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA): An Update

The Trueness of Obturator Prosthesis Base Manufactured by Conventional and 3D Printing Techniques

Digital Workflow in Maxillofacial Prosthodontics—An Update on Defect Data Acquisition, Editing and Design Using Open-Source and Commercial Available Software

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About