{"title":"A Comparison Between the Expansion Force Exerted by Thermo-Printed Aligners and 3D Printed Aligners: An In Vitro Study.","authors":"Samuele Avolese, Simone Parrini, Andrea Tancredi Lugas, Cristina Bignardi, Mara Terzini, Valentina Cantù, Tommaso Castroflorio, Emanuele Grifalconi, Nicola Scotti, Fabrizio Sanna","doi":"10.3390/bioengineering12090912","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The fabrication of orthodontic aligners directly via three-dimensional (3D) printing presents potential to increase the efficiency of aligner production relative to traditional workflows; however, several aspects of the 3D printing process might affect the dimensional fidelity of the fabricated appliances. The aim of this study is to measure the forces expressed by a 3D printed aligner made with TC-85 DAC resin (Grapy Inc., Seoul, Republic of Korea) when an expansion movement of the entire upper dental arch is programmed, comparing the measured forces with those obtained by a common thermoformed aligner (Smart Track<sup>®</sup>, Align Technology, Santa Clara, CA, USA).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A patient in transitional mixed dentition was selected, with the presence of all the first molars and permanent upper and lower incisors, and the canines and premolars have not started the exchange. From this patient, a virtual set up of the upper arch has been planned with an expansion of 0.2 mm and 0.4 mm per side; 3 mm horizontal rectangular attachments were added to the set up on the vestibular surface of the permanent molars, deciduous premolars, and deciduous canines. On this set up, 10 Smart Track aligners and 10 3D printed aligners with TC-85 DAC resin were produced. The fabricated aligners were mounted on the machinery used for the test (ElectroForce<sup>®</sup> Test Bench; TA Instruments, New Castle, DE, USA) by means of specific supports that simulate the upper arch of the patient (divided into two sides: right and left). To simulate the intraoral environment, the measurements were carried out in a thermostatic bath at a temperature of 37 °C.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The key results of this paper showed differences between Smart Track<sup>®</sup> and TC-85 DAC. In particular, the expanding force exerted by the 0.2 mm per side expanded Smart Track<sup>®</sup> aligners was on average +0.2162 N with a D.S. of ±0.0051 N during the 8 h; meanwhile, the force exerted by the 0.2 mm per side expanded TC-85 DAC 3D printed aligners was on average -0.0034 N with a D.S. of ±0.0036 N during the 8 h. The force exerted by the 0.4 mm per side expanded Smart Track<sup>®</sup> aligners was on average +0.7159 N with a D.S. of ±0.0543 N during the 8 h; meanwhile, the force exerted by the 0.4 mm per side expanded TC-85 DAC 3D printed aligners was on average +0.0141 N with a D.S. of ±0.004 N during the 8 h.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Smart Track<sup>®</sup> aligners express a quantitatively measurable force in Newtons during the programmed movements to obtain a posterior expansion of the dental arches; on the contrary, aligners made with TC-85 DAC resin, in light of the results obtained from this study, express forces close to 0 during the realization of the movements programmed to obtain a posterior expansion of the dental arches.</p>","PeriodicalId":8874,"journal":{"name":"Bioengineering","volume":"12 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12467414/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioengineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering12090912","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The fabrication of orthodontic aligners directly via three-dimensional (3D) printing presents potential to increase the efficiency of aligner production relative to traditional workflows; however, several aspects of the 3D printing process might affect the dimensional fidelity of the fabricated appliances. The aim of this study is to measure the forces expressed by a 3D printed aligner made with TC-85 DAC resin (Grapy Inc., Seoul, Republic of Korea) when an expansion movement of the entire upper dental arch is programmed, comparing the measured forces with those obtained by a common thermoformed aligner (Smart Track®, Align Technology, Santa Clara, CA, USA).
Materials and methods: A patient in transitional mixed dentition was selected, with the presence of all the first molars and permanent upper and lower incisors, and the canines and premolars have not started the exchange. From this patient, a virtual set up of the upper arch has been planned with an expansion of 0.2 mm and 0.4 mm per side; 3 mm horizontal rectangular attachments were added to the set up on the vestibular surface of the permanent molars, deciduous premolars, and deciduous canines. On this set up, 10 Smart Track aligners and 10 3D printed aligners with TC-85 DAC resin were produced. The fabricated aligners were mounted on the machinery used for the test (ElectroForce® Test Bench; TA Instruments, New Castle, DE, USA) by means of specific supports that simulate the upper arch of the patient (divided into two sides: right and left). To simulate the intraoral environment, the measurements were carried out in a thermostatic bath at a temperature of 37 °C.
Results: The key results of this paper showed differences between Smart Track® and TC-85 DAC. In particular, the expanding force exerted by the 0.2 mm per side expanded Smart Track® aligners was on average +0.2162 N with a D.S. of ±0.0051 N during the 8 h; meanwhile, the force exerted by the 0.2 mm per side expanded TC-85 DAC 3D printed aligners was on average -0.0034 N with a D.S. of ±0.0036 N during the 8 h. The force exerted by the 0.4 mm per side expanded Smart Track® aligners was on average +0.7159 N with a D.S. of ±0.0543 N during the 8 h; meanwhile, the force exerted by the 0.4 mm per side expanded TC-85 DAC 3D printed aligners was on average +0.0141 N with a D.S. of ±0.004 N during the 8 h.
Conclusions: Smart Track® aligners express a quantitatively measurable force in Newtons during the programmed movements to obtain a posterior expansion of the dental arches; on the contrary, aligners made with TC-85 DAC resin, in light of the results obtained from this study, express forces close to 0 during the realization of the movements programmed to obtain a posterior expansion of the dental arches.
期刊介绍:
Aims
Bioengineering (ISSN 2306-5354) provides an advanced forum for the science and technology of bioengineering. It publishes original research papers, comprehensive reviews, communications and case reports. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. All aspects of bioengineering are welcomed from theoretical concepts to education and applications. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. There are, in addition, four key features of this Journal:
● We are introducing a new concept in scientific and technical publications “The Translational Case Report in Bioengineering”. It is a descriptive explanatory analysis of a transformative or translational event. Understanding that the goal of bioengineering scholarship is to advance towards a transformative or clinical solution to an identified transformative/clinical need, the translational case report is used to explore causation in order to find underlying principles that may guide other similar transformative/translational undertakings.
● Manuscripts regarding research proposals and research ideas will be particularly welcomed.
● Electronic files and software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material.
● We also accept manuscripts communicating to a broader audience with regard to research projects financed with public funds.
Scope
● Bionics and biological cybernetics: implantology; bio–abio interfaces
● Bioelectronics: wearable electronics; implantable electronics; “more than Moore” electronics; bioelectronics devices
● Bioprocess and biosystems engineering and applications: bioprocess design; biocatalysis; bioseparation and bioreactors; bioinformatics; bioenergy; etc.
● Biomolecular, cellular and tissue engineering and applications: tissue engineering; chromosome engineering; embryo engineering; cellular, molecular and synthetic biology; metabolic engineering; bio-nanotechnology; micro/nano technologies; genetic engineering; transgenic technology
● Biomedical engineering and applications: biomechatronics; biomedical electronics; biomechanics; biomaterials; biomimetics; biomedical diagnostics; biomedical therapy; biomedical devices; sensors and circuits; biomedical imaging and medical information systems; implants and regenerative medicine; neurotechnology; clinical engineering; rehabilitation engineering
● Biochemical engineering and applications: metabolic pathway engineering; modeling and simulation
● Translational bioengineering