JPID - Vol 05 - Issue 03


*Dushyant Soni, **Sheen Singh Mehta, **Amrit Assi, ****Deborah L Pachuau
*Professor, **Post graduate Students, Department of Prosthodontics, Vyas Dental College, Jodhpur, India | Corresponding Author: Dr. Sheen Singh Mehta, E-mail:


3D printing is a revolutionary concept based on additive process. It offers multifaceted applications for dentistry in general and prosthodontics in particular. A myriad of advantages like reproducibility, accuracy, customisation and ability to create complex parts with ease in less time have provided improved patient treatment options and compliance. This article presents an overview on currently available technologies and their utilisation.

Abbreviations: CAD-computer aided designing, FDM-fused deposition modelling, SLS-selective laser sintering, SLA- standard triangular language, PLA-polylactic acid.

Key words: 3D printing, CAD/CAM, additive manufacturing, bio printing, selective laser sintering, fused deposition modelling.


Charles Hull in 1983 printed the first 3D-object using stereolithography.1 Digital dentistry was pioneered by Francois Duret in 1970, with some initial hiccups it took time to be integrated into current practice.

Last few years have seen strikingly increased application of 3D printing. The desired object/site is scanned using an intraoral (IS) 3D scanner or built using a CAD software. IS consists of a mini camera, integrated software and a computer.

Data is obtained as STF files (standard triangular language)/STL (standard tessalation lan-guage). This information is always broken down and stored as triangles or tessellation. The tessellation is the process of linking the surface with geometric shapes to avoid overlaps and gaps. Stitching the triangular files leads to a process of STL2 . These STL files store the surface geometry of objects and this information is encoded in ASCII (American Standard Code For Information Interchange) or Binary coding mostly which is used for small sizes3 . This in-formation is used to print objects in layers through various digital slicing and physically re-produces layers with an automated process4 . Additive Manufacturing is an additive process referred to as rapid prototyping where a lot of layers are added in contrast to traditional process like subtractive manufacturing5

. The most widely used additive methods include fused deposition modelling (FDM), Stereo lithography (SLA), Selective laser printing (SLS), Polyjet Printing and Bioprinting6 , Direct metal laser sintering. A variety of materials can be used which include plastics, ceramics, resins and metals

Fused Deposition Modelling:

Developed by Scott Crump 1988, melted material generally thermoplastic polymers such as poly lactic acid (PLA) polycarbonate, polyether ether ketone (PEEK) is extruded through a nozzle to print layer by layer. Print head has multi nozzle and extrudes different types of material at the same time7 . It is the printer of choice for in-house production of 3D models8 . It is a flexible method however its use is limited to temporary crown and bridges manufacturing. Limitations include limited colour selection, moderate printing resolution, and complete removal of support material, surface quality and time efficiency.

Selective Laser Printing (SLS) and Stereolithography (SLA):

Both use laser to scan and build object layer by layer but in selective laser sintering powder-based material is used for printing.

SLA uses photo polymerisation - a process by which the UV laser beam causes chain of molecules to link together and form polymers.9 Products are built with application of UV laser inside a vat of resin.10

SLA is used for printing from CT (DICOM data). Advantages include good printing resolution as compared to FDM; support material removal is less too hence less wastage.

SLA is used to print surgical guides, aligners, dental models and crowns, RPD’s, fabrication of implant surgical guides.

SLS prints FDP’S, metal crowns and RPD’S. They can replicate intricate geometries and provide biodegradable scaffold for tissue engineering.

Polyjet Printers:

Printers with highest resolution. 3D model is created one layer at a time by the printer head getting layers of liquid photopolymer acrylic plastic build tray followed by UV light curing11. It uses widest choice of printing materials with varieties in density, hardness, flexibility and porosity. Resolution is as fine as 25-80 microns, faster printing and replication of complex geometries.

Disadvantage includes post print model processing such as intensive washing and removal of support material.12

Applications include planning patient specific 3D models with complicated geometries, surgical stents and guides, phantoms for orthopaedic and cardiac surgeries, scaffolds for tissue engineering.13, 14, 15


Uses photo polymerising materials stimulating natural cells such as chitosan, agar, alginate to print hard and soft tissue scaffolds. Bio printing uses cell ink based bio printers or spheroid or micro tissue based systems have been developed to generate artificial tissues, complex 3D in vitro models.16,17 With that the additive manufacturing has given a new face to discipline of stem cell therapeutics with the flexibility of printing cells into desired 3D complex, employing it for transplantation and regeneration.18 3D printing has found its applications in generating optimal values of human bone and skin grafts in vitro.19 This has immense potential to replace the current strategies of procuring auto grafts which is associated with donor site morbidity and loss of structure.20

Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS):

This technology is used to produce metal parts with high accuracy and better mechanical strength. In this technology metal material is added layer by layer and a laser beam is used to fuse metal at a point.21,22 This uses titanium, cobalt, aluminium, bronze alloy, steel. Approximate accuracy is 25- 35µm.

Laminated Object Manufacturing (LOM):

3D models are fabricated by adding layers of the defined sheet of materials. A laser is used to cut sheet as per the required cross section. Adhesives are used to combine the layers and generated by repeating the steps.23,24

Electron Beam Melting (EBM):

Powerful electron beam is used to build product layer by layer by using a metal powder by command of the CAD model with exact geometry. Under a vacuum the raw material is stored and fused by an electron beam.25, 26 Vacuum eliminates impurities.


A literature search using search engines such as Google scholar and Pubmed with keywords was done, all articles from 2016 to 2020 printed in English, inclusive of case reports, in vitro studies and systematic reviews were considered.


Minev R, Minev E, 201627 stated that shrinkage of 3D printed models is an unavoidable problem during the printing process and it affects printing accuracy of most 3D printers. FDM shrinkage occurs due to thermal contraction when melted filaments solidify. In SLA and multijet shrinkage occurs due to polymerisation. Hambali RH, Cheong KM, Azizan N, 201728 concluded that FDM has bad surface quality due to staircase effect of manufacturing using material extruding through a nozzle. This was improved by approximately 97.2% via immersion in acetone solution for 300 seconds. This chemical treatment is one of the most economical and fast methods to enhance surface quality of additive manufacturing parts for future manufacturing industry. Raymond E Rebong et al 201829 assessed the dimensional accuracy of 3D models with each other and compared with traditional plaster casts. They concluded amongst FDM, SLA, and Polyjet printing, the FDM had fewest dimensional measurement differences as compared to plaster mode.

Daniel Khorsandi et al 201830 Compared SLA and FDM methods of rapid prototyping. They stated that SLA offers greater efficiency, high level of accuracy. Layer thickness of two different techniques FDM 0.5-0.127mm as compared to SLA 0.05-0. 015mm. Both however make rough patterns that need to be polished to limit bacterial retention. Ucar et al, 201831 published an in vitro study to show that the ceramics manufactured by stereolithography show comparable mechanical properties to milled ceramics. However, manufacturing process and strength, fracture toughness are areas that require further research. To improve the properties of ceramics so produced, porosity should be eradicated resulting in denser more compact mixture. Kim et al, 201832 proposed a new digital prosthesis using an FDM printer to make a flask for making a complete denture. This took 7 hours to complete and showed satisfactory results in terms of completeness of complete denture. Using a universal development system software, denture design STL and a denture flask STL were superimposed, and the denture region was set as an empty space. Conventional artificial teeth were inserted into the 3D manufactured flask, resin packing, finishing and polishing was done using conventional method of fabrication of complete denture. Fusong Yuan, Yao Sun, Lei Zhang, 201933 implant guide CAD and FDM 3D printing were used to achieve a chair- side high efficiency design for production of implant guides. Visual inspection revealed that the positioning of 30 implant guides was successful and retention was satisfactory. A comparison of 3D data of printed implant guide and CAD guide demonstrated a morphological error of 0.5999 plus minus 0.146. Making FDM and CAD time saving, efficient chair side methods. Lee D et al, 202034 stated digital light processing 3D printers (DLP) produce shrinkage depending on the material and polymerisation method. Owing to material characteristics the FDM accuracy of full arch dental models is supposed to be higher than that of the DLP however due to surface roughness of the FDM method the crown preparation die for dental prosthesis is not accurate. Therefore, a new hybrid dental model that combines the FDM for full arch and DLP for specific die is proposed.

Yoshiki Ishida et al, 202035 Compared the accuracy of cylindrical patterns fabricated with consumer FDM 3D printers with consumer SLA 3D Printers. After the patency of FDM device expired, several types of small consumer 3D printers were introduced for personal use. The accuracy of these less priced printers was compared with dental FDM 3D and SLA 3D printers. The consumer printers had worse accuracy than dental printers. An enlargement adjustment of 1-3% along the horizontal axis was necessary to realise the set design. In terms of surface roughness consumer SLA produced smooth patterns. Hence, they concluded that consumer printers have potential to be used in dental applications.

Not only for manufacturing 3D has led to an exemplary shift in training by providing idealistic plastic typodonts to more real-life 3D printed models that are based on data obtained by intraoral scan of patients36. Polyjet printing has successfully been used to create models in different levels of hardness, replicating that of healthy enamel, dentin and caries so that the trainee experience proprioception of working on real tooth37. 3D manufacturing undoubtedly offers a promising future due to its multiple applications and accurate detail reproduction however at the same time it involves high investment cost. One of its largest limitation is the quality. Due to the way successive layers are deposited on top of each other an inherent weakness is literally build into the design. Finishing of final product is time consuming and requires skill. Depending on the material it may need additional treatment to reach full strength. For example, zirconia blocks used require further sintering to reach high strength. SLA can be done only by using photopolymerising resins. These are messy and can cause inflammation and irritation on inhalation. Also, resins cannot be heat sterilised.


3D printing has the potential of revolutionising dentistry in general and Prosthodontics in particular. Although the initial investment is high and it requires training in usage, it helps to reduce the time for actual patient care. In today’s scenario of emerging infective pandemics minimal exposure to the clinician, technician and patient can be offered. It can allow patient care from any part of the world by exchange of information. It has a great potential in research and treatment modalities. Because the print object is produced according to the image of the patient, the print can be tailored to optimally fit the condition of the patient. The problem that requires further research is the limitation of available material assortment in particular when moving beyond the canonical polymers as well as improvement of printing speed and post processing requires.

Although it is not a replacement for conventional treatment methods but its scope to improve and develop is what the future of dentistry holds.

Source of support:

Conflicts of interest:
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


  1. Kohli Tarika MA. 3D printing in dentistry–An overview. Acta Scientific Dental Sciences. 2019;3:35-41.
  2. Chander NG. An overview on 3D printing in prosthodontics. JIndian Prosthodont Soc2020;20(2):121.
  3. Prithviraj DR, Bhalla HK, Vashisht R, Sounderraj K, Prithvi S. Revolutionizing restorative dentistry: An overview. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2014;14:333-43.
  4. Richert R, Goujat A, Venet L, Viguie G, Viennot S, Robinson P, et al. Intraoral scanner technologies: A review to make a successful impression. J HealthcEng2017;2017:8427595. doi: 10.1155/2017/8427595.
  5. Bhambhani R, Bhattacharya J, Sen SK. Digitization and its futuristic approach in prosthodontics. J In-dian Prosthodont Soc 2013;13:165-74.
  6. Leray M, Knowlton N. DNA barcoding and metabarcoding of standardized samples reveal patterns of marine benthic diversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015 Feb 17;112(7):2076-81.
  7. Taylor AC, Beirne S, Alici G, Wallace GG. System and process development for coaxial extrusion in fused deposition modelling. Rapid Prototyp J. 2017;23(3):543– 550. 16.
  8. Huang Q, Wang W, Neumann U. Recurrent slice networks for 3d segmentation of point clouds. InProceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 2018 (pp. 2626-2635).
  9. Mazzoli A. Selective laser sintering in biomedical engineering. Medical & biological engineering & computing. 2013 Mar;51(3):245-56
  10. Javaid M, Haleem A. Current status and applications of additive manufacturing in dentistry: A literature-based review. Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. 2019 Jul 1;9(3):179-85.
  11. Ionita CN, Mokin M, Varble N, Bednarek DR, Xiang J, Snyder KV, Siddiqui AH, Levy EI, Meng H, Rudin S. Challenges and limitations of patient-specific vascular phantom fabrication using 3D Polyjet printing. In Medical Imaging 2014: Biomedical Applications in Molecular, Structural, and Functional Imaging 2014 Mar 13 (Vol. 9038, p. 90380M). International Society for Optics and Photonics.
  12. Han T, Kundu S, Nag A, Xu Y. 3D printed sensors for biomedical applications: a review. Sensors. 2019 Jan;19(7):1706.
  13. Tardieu PB, Vrielinck L, Escolano E, Henne M, Tardieu AL. Computer-assisted implant placement: scan template, simplant, surgiguide, and SAFE system. International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry. 2007 Apr 1;27(2).
  14. Bernhard JC, Isotani S, Matsugasumi T, Duddalwar V, Hung AJ, Suer E, Baco E, Satkunasivam R, Djaladat H, Metcalfe C, Hu B. Personalized 3D printed model of kidney and tumor anatomy: a useful tool for patient education. World journal of urology. 2016 Mar 1;34(3):337- 45.
  15. Osman RB, van der Veen AJ, Huiberts D, Wismeijer D, Alharbi N. 3D-printing zirconia implants; a dream or a reality? An in-vitro study evaluating the dimensional accuracy, surface topography and mechanical properties of printed zirconia implant and discs. Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials. 2017 Nov 1;75:521-8
  16. Blakely AM, Manning KL, Tripathi A, Morgan JR. Bio-pick, place, and perfuse: a new instrument for three-dimensional tissue engineering. Tissue Engineering Part C: Methods. 2015 Jul 1;21(7):737-46.
  17. Lee JM, Sing SL, Zhou M, Yeong WY. 3D bioprinting processes: A perspective on classification and terminology. International Journal of Bioprinting. 2018;4(2).
  18. Murphy SV, Atala A. 3D bioprinting of tissues and organs. Nature biotechnology. 2014 Aug;32(8):773-85
  19. Almela T, Al-Sahaf S, Brook IM, Khoshroo K, Rasoulianboroujeni M, Fahimipour F, Tahriri M, Dashtimoghadam E, Bolt R, Tayebi L, Moharamzadeh K. 3D printed tissue engineered model for bone invasion of oral cancer. Tissue and Cell. 2018 Jun 1;52:71-7.
  20. Chiarello E, Cadossi M, Tedesco G, Capra P, Calamelli C, Shehu A, Giannini S. Autograft, allograft and bone substitutes in reconstructive orthopedic surgery. Aging clinical and experimental research. 2013 Oct;25(1):101-3.
  21. Alsalla HH, Smith C, Hao L. The effect of different build orientations on the consolida-tion,tensile and fracture toughness properties of direct metal laser sintering Ti-6Al-4V. Rapid Prototyp J. 2018;24(2):276–284.
  22. Salmi M, Tuomi J, Paloheimo KS, et al. Patient-specific reconstruction with 3Dmodeling and DMLS additive manufacturing. Rapid Prototyp J. 2012;18:209–214.
  23. Chiu YY, Liao YS. Laser path planning of burn-out rule for LOM process. RapidPrototyp J. 2003;9(4):201–211.
  24. Kechagias J, Maropoulos S, Karagiannis S. Process build-time estimator algorithm for laminated object manufacturing. Rapid Prototyp J. 2004;10(5):297–304.
  25. Cronskär M, Bäckström M, Rännar LE. Production of customized hip stem prostheses– a comparison between conventional machining and electron beam melting (EBM).RapidPrototyp J. 2013;19(5):365–372.
  26. Petrovic V, Niñerola R. Powder recyclability in electron beam melting for aeronautical use. Aircraft Eng Aero Technol: Int J. 2015;87(2):147–155.
  27. Minev R, Minev E. Technologies for rapid prototyping (RP)- basic concepts, quality issues and modern trends. Scripta ScientificaMedicinaeDentalis. 2016 May 17;2(1):12-22.
  28. Hambali RH, Cheong KM, Azizan N. Analysis of the influence of chemical treatment to the strength and surface roughness of FDM. InIOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 2017 Jun 1 (Vol. 210, No. 1, p. 012063). IOP Publishing.
  29. Rebong RE, Stewart KT, Utreja A, Ghoneima AA. Accuracy of three-dimensional dental resin models created by fused deposition modeling, stereolithography, and Polyjet prototype technologies: A comparative study. The Angle Orthodontist. 2018 May;88(3):363-9.
  30. Khorsandi D, Fahimipour A, Abasian P, Saber SS, Seyedi M, Ghanavati S, Ahmad A, De Stephanis AA, Taghavinezhaddilami F, Leonova A, Mohammadinejad R. 3D and 4D printing in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery: Printing techniques, materials, and applications. Acta Biomaterialia. 2020 Dec 26.
  31. Ucar Y, Ekren O. Effect of layered manufacturing techniques, alloy powders, and layer thickness on mechanical properties of Co-Cr dental alloys. The journal of prosthetic dentistry. 2018 Nov 1;120(5):762-70.
  32. Kim H, Lee D, Lee SY, Yang H, Park SW, Lim HP, Yun KD, Park C. Denture flask fabrication using fused deposition modeling three-dimensional printing. Journal of prosthodontic research. 2020 Apr 1;64(2):231-4.
  33. Yuan F, Sun Y, Zhang L, Sun Y. Accuracy of chair-side fused-deposition modelling for dental applications. Rapid Prototyping Journal. 2019 Jun 10.
  34. Lee D, Lee SY, Kim H, Park C. A Hybrid Dental Model Concept Utilizing Fused Deposition Modeling and Digital Light Processing 3D Printing. Int. J. Prosthodont. 2020 Mar 1;33:229-31.
  35. Ishida Y, Miura D, Miyasaka T, Shinya A. Dimensional Accuracy of Dental Casting Patterns Fabricated Using Consumer 3D Printers. Polymers. 2020 Oct;12(10):2244.
  36. Hugger A, Hugger S, Kordass B. Dental education in Germany: new concepts for the dental curriculum. Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz. 2011 Sep 1;54(9):1046-51.
  37. Schweiger J, Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Edelhoff D, Magne P, Güth JF. Histo-anatomic 3D printing of dental structures. British dental journal. 2016 Nov;221(9):555-60.
  38. Critchley R. The preparation and characterisation of auxetic foams for the application of trauma attenuating backings (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southampton).

JPID – The journal of Prosthetic and Implant Dentistry / Volume 5 Issue 3 / May–Aug 2022

Copyright © 2017-2022 Indian Prosthodontic Society Kerala State Branch | IPSKERALA.COM | Powered by Dentaura.Com