J Adv Prosthodont.  2021 Oct;13(5):327-332. 10.4047/jap.2021.13.5.327.

Subtractive versus additive indirect manufacturing techniques of digitally designed partial dentures

• Snosi AM
• Lotfy SM
• Thabet YG
• Sabet ME
• Rizk FN

• KMID: 2522064
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2021.13.5.327

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of digitally designed removable partial denture (RPD) frameworks, constructed by additive and subtractive methods castable resin patterns, using comparative 3D analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A Kennedy class III mod. 1 educational maxillary model was used in this study. The cast was scanned after modification, and a removable partial denture framework was digitally designed. Twelve frameworks were constructed. Two groups were defined: Group A: six frameworks were milled with castable resin, then casted by the lost wax technique into Co-Cr frameworks; Group B: six frameworks were printed with castable resin, then casted by the lost wax technique into Co-Cr frameworks. Comparative 3D analysis was used to measure the accuracy of the fabricated frameworks using Geomagic Control X software. Student's t-test was used for comparing data. P value ≤ .05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS
Regarding the accuracy of the occlusal rests, group A (milled) (0.1417 ± 0.0224) showed significantly higher accuracy than group B (printed) (0.02347 ± 0.0221). The same results were found regarding the 3D comparison of the overall accuracy, in which group A (0.1501 ± 0.0205) was significantly more accurate than group B (0.179 ± 0.0137).
CONCLUSION
In indirect fabrication techniques, subtractive manufacturing yields more accurate RPDs than additive manufacturing.

Keyword

Milling; 3D printing; Removable partial dentures (RPDs); Accuracy