The evolution of rapid prototyping

in dentistry: a review
Abbas Azari and Sakineh Nikzad
Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Removable Prosthodontics, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract
Purpose The goal of rapid mechanical prototyping is to be able to quickly fabricate complex-shaped, 3D parts directly from computer-aided design
models. The key idea of this novel technology is based upon decomposition of 3D computer models data into thin cross-sectional layers, followed by
physically forming the layers and stacking them up; layer by layer technique. This new method of modeling has raised many attentions in dentistry
especially in the field of surgery and implantology. The purpose of this review study is to represent the historical development and various methods
currently used for building dental appliances. It is also aimed to show the many benefits which can be achieved by using this new technology in various
branches of dentistry.
Design/methodology/approach The major existing resources, including unpublished data on the internet, were considered.
Findings Although, creating 3D objects in a layered fashion is an idea almost as old as human civilization but, this technology has only
recently been employed to build 3D complex models in dentistry. It seems that in near future many other methods will develop which could
change traditional dental practices. It is advisable to include more unit hours in dental curriculums to acquaint dental students with the many
benefits of this novel technology.
Originality/value It is hard to believe that the routine dental techniques were affected by revolutionary concepts originally theorized by engineering
methods. It is a reality that in future, most of the restorative disciplines will be fully revised and the computer methods be evolved to an extent where
dentistry can be performed by computer-assisted methods with optimum safety, simplicity, and reliability.

Keywords Rapid prototypes, Computer aided design, Dentistry

Paper type Research paper

The concept of modeling; dental approach
Model and modeling are common terms amongst dental
professionals. Perhaps, from the inception of modern
dentistry, these terms have been used in many different
forms and for various necessities. According to the Glossary
of prosthodontic terms (The Academy of Prosthodontics,
2005) (GPT 8), The term model has been used in dentistry
since 1572 and defined as a miniature representation of
something; an example for imitation or emulation.
Surprisingly, this term however, is not defined in medicine
in the same manner. In Merriam-Websters Medical Desk
Dictionary (model definition, 2008), the term model is defined
as to produce (as by computer) a representation or
simulation of. One may be confused with this non-
similarity in definition but, it is obvious that emulation
and simulation are not the same. The spreading of
engineering sciences in the medical/dental counterpart,
made it possible to gain access to these two different
disciplines and find good explanations and solutions for
problems routinely involved in each methodology. It is a
reality that dentistry, in its modern form, has been affected by
the techniques utilized in other science methodologies such as
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-2546.htm
mechanics, electronics, metallurgy, and many others. In view
of this fact, several merging technologies have been evolved by
utilizing both techniques in a wise manner. This
multidisciplinary approach drastically improved sciences like
prosthodontics and restorative dentistry in many aspects.
Although merging different technologies were initially very
beneficial but, soon after some conflict arose from
interdisciplinary terms and this has affected dentistry. The
term model is one of these interdisciplinary terms which are
not defined with similarity.
Usually, models used in dentistry are made by impression
making techniques in which some type of specially designed
liquefy materials set in the mouth after a specific period of
time. These materials, namely impression materials,
commonly transfer to patients mouth by means of a holder
device called tray. It is generally perceived among dental
professions that an impression, or negative likeness of the
teeth and surrounding structures, is necessary to obtain a cast
which can then be used to make a restoration in the
laboratory. For more than a century, this technology was
taught in dental faculties as a relatively cheap and easy to use
technique. This technology however necessitates skillful
human efforts, i.e. dental technicians, to be able to work on
casts/models obtained by impression making to fabricate
precision restorations, usually by traditional waxing or plastic
forming and investment casting technology. It is a reality that
the quality and accuracy of the final product however,

Rapid Prototyping Journal

15/3 (2009) 216 225 Received: 27 April 2008
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1355-2546] Revised: 26 January 2009
[DOI 10.1108/13552540910961946] Accepted: 4 March 2009

216
 Evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review
Abbas Azari and Sakineh Nikzad
depends mostly on the technician/clinician subjective
judgment (Figure 1). On the other hand, there are several
reports regarding inherent impression inaccuracy and casting
shortcomings (Gelbard et al., 1994; Johnston et al., 1971;
Luthardt et al., 2006; Luthardt et al., 2005; Morey, 1992;
Taggart, 1907; Hollenback, 1962) and the inception and fast
development of computer sciences and laser technology
makes a delightful resort.
Attempts to utilize engineering methods: no
impression approaches
The first attempts for computer-assisted production of dental
restorations were made in 1971 (Duret et al., 1988). The
development in the area of computer-aided design/computer-
aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) systems was then
accelerated by commercialization of portable computers.
According to literature, this technology has grown in dentistry
in the late 1980s and the introduction of first commercial
product by incorporating the engineering principles has
stimulated further interest (Isenberg et al., 1991; Rekow et al.,
1991; Rekow, 2006). Soon after, it was feasible to produce
crowns with CAD/CAM technology to fit at least as well as
those produced with conventional casting conditions. The
main benefits of this type of machining system was that
impressions are not needed anymore, which believe to save
the dentist chair time and remove one asepsis link between the
patient-dentist operational field and the dental laboratory
technicians (Rekow, 2006).
Figure 1 Current methods utilized in restorative dentistry
3 Master model
2 Impression
1 Patient
10 Patient
9 Veneering
8 Preparation
Note: From the patient visit to deliver the final restoration
217
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 15 Number 3 2009 216 225
The problem of data capturing
In contrast to the conventional impression techniques, the
CAD technology uses another approach for data acquisition;
namely digitizing. Review of literature showed that two
different forms of digital data capturing system are used in
dental CAD technology; contact and non-contact digitizing
methods (Chang et al., 2006). The process of digitizing in the
contact systems is basically accomplished by moving a
touching probe around the surface of proposed physical
object and the captured data will then be used for creating a
3D computer model (Figure 2). The data capturing
mechanism for the non-contact method is different and
usually implemented by an optical process in which a ray of
light or a laser device uses for surface data acquisition
(Figure 3). Whatever methods used, the data acquisitioned by
both techniques will be used for numerical control (NC)
machining, which are typically for small model-making
models such as fabricating a metallic and/or ceramic crowns
or bridges. These types of CAD/CAM devices are mainly
representing either the prepared tooth or wax model of the
desired substructure and are commonly used in three different
forms (Kelly, 2007):
1 directly milling of fully dense ceramics;
2 creating an enlarged die upon which ceramic powder is
packed; and
3 machining an oversized part made by partially fired
ceramic powder.
4 Wax up
5 Mould
6 Casting
7 Devesting
 Evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review Rapid Prototyping Journal
Abbas Azari and Sakineh Nikzad Volume 15 Number 3 2009 216 225

Figure 2 A typical device used the non-contact concept complex milling parts. So, another type of machining is
required which can make medical/dental parts (models) with
high precision, as fast as possible and without difficulties
encountered during simple milling.

Rapid prototyping: an innovative method for

model building
To fabricate a physical prototype (model) in industry and/or
medicine; two different approaches have been utilized:
subtractive and additive (Liu et al., 2006). The subtractive
technique is usually accomplished by the conventional NC
machining, generally milling (Petzold et al., 1999). The input
data for this method are principally from an optical or contact
probe surface digitizer which can only capture the external
surface data of the anatomy and not the internal tissue
structure of the proposed object. NC machining is used
Source: Ranishaw PCL., New Mills, UK typically in small model-making machines and this is the main
reason for using them to fabricate metallic and/or ceramic
crowns in dentistry (Figures 4 and 5).
Figure 3 Acquisition system through laser digitizing and surface
The additive technologies, on the other hand, can produce
scanning
arbitrarily complex shapes with cavities; which is usually the
case in human anatomy structures. The key idea of this
innovative method which is also called Layered
manufacturing or solid free form fabrication, is that a
Laser solid 3D CAD model of an object decomposed into cross-
projector sectional layer representations and then numerical files in the

Figure 4 A typical subtractive method

Camera

Laser
digitizing

Note: It uses a detector for the surface and a camera for the textures 1 2

Despite of many advantages reported for small CAD systems,

there are however some limitations which necessitate
attention (Table I).
It is obvious that this type of manufacturing has number of
advantages which make it well suited for routine dental
procedures (e.g. in small restorative dentistry) however, it is
neither easy nor economic for big, full of undercuts and/or 3 4
Notes: Laser digitizing of object (DIE material), creating a CAD model,
Table I The main reported disadvantages for small CAD/CAM in planning the virtual COPING on CAD model and finally converting the
virtual COPING by MILLING Process to a real object
dentistry
Source: SIRONA-CEREC-inlab, From VITA Zahnfabrik, Germany
Potamianos et al. (1998) Restricted motion capability
Difficulty to machine complex geometries
Figure 5 A typical subtractive method
Tools/work peace collisions
Klein et al. (1992) Materials used must be hard
Materials used must be tough
Materials used must be capable to sterilize
Weiss (1997) More human proficiency is mandatory
Geometric limitations
Christensen (2006) More cost expenditure Notes: In this case a CAD model (Right) has been prepared for producing a
Operator competency with computer devices Titanium Bridge (Left); a true example of virtual conception to a real
metallic object
Familiarity with CAD/CAM devices
Source: From CYNOVAD Dentalmatic Technologies Inc., Canada

218
 Evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review Rapid Prototyping Journal
Abbas Azari and Sakineh Nikzad Volume 15 Number 3 2009 216 225

form of virtual trajectories guiding material additive processes
to physically rapid build up these layers in an automated
fabrication machine to form the object called the prototype
(Weiss, 1997) (Figure 6). In this way, the captured 3D data
set, rapidly slice into cross-sections, and construct layers from
the bottom up, bonding one on top of the other, to produce
models for applications. It was demonstrated that by using
this method the overall production time will reduce
considerably and complex models which are otherwise
difficult and/or impossible to make by the conventional NC
machining process could be build up rather easily (Liu et al.,
2006). Owing to these capabilities, using additive methods for
Medical Modeling (prototyping) is more advantageous and
many problems usually accompanied by milling can be easily
overcome. The main advantage of this type of model
manufacturing in building the medical/dental parts is the
ability of the technique to create minor details such as
undercuts, voids, and complex internal geometries
(neurovascular canals or sinuses, etc.) in the proposed model.
It is obvious however, that gathering information from
internal structures requires somewhat different steps for data
capturing which is not possible with merely optical or touch
probe surface capturing devices. This drawback was
accidentally resolved by an innovating technology: computer
axial tomography scanning.
millimeter to 10 or 20 mm, respectively, (Hildebolt et al.,
1990; Vannier et al., 1984). One of the most prominent
features of computed tomography (CT) scan images is that
they possess no magnification errors caused by geometric
distortions; while such errors are common in conventional
dental/medical radiographs (Rosenfeld and Mecall, 1996;
Sonic et al., 1994). The information collected from each plane
is numerically analyzed to derive the spatial distribution of the
X-ray densities within the plane. Information can then be put
together to provide a volumetric image of the structure
(Figures 7 and 8).
At about the same time, as CT was demonstrated,
application of nuclear magnetic resonance as an
interrogation probe was also demonstrated. The name of
this modality evolved over the years to magnetic resonance
interferometry (MRI) and then finally to MR scanning. MR
differs from CT in one major aspect: the MR system is tuned
to hydrogen, a common constituent in most soft-tissue
cellular matter. It is assumed that this measurement will
define the spatial locations of organs by differentiating them
according to the densities of hydrogen within their tissues
Figure 7 A typical modern spiral CT scan machine

3D radiographic modalities: the key for fast

growing up of RP in medicine/dentistry
It seems that what is the most influential in the field of RP in
medicine is the many developments occurred in the early
1970s through introducing computerized tomography to
medical community (Hounsfield, 1973). This new mode of
X-ray imaging was considerably changed the field of view of
physicians from 2D to 3D, based on tomographic (slice by
slice) scanning. Interestingly, this advent greatly facilitated
access to the internal morphology of soft tissue and bony
structures by acquiring a series of individual images which
principally represent cross-sections through the body. The
image slices are usually from sub-millimeter slice to 10 mm
thick and the distances between them are from tenth of

Figure 6 Sketch of a typical additive method from virtual CAD model to

real object
Figure 8 Principle of imaging acquisition in CT scanning
3d solid model
representation Slicing
Trajectory Material addition processes
Data planning Motion
exchange control
format trajectories Scanner images

Scanning the object Resulting image set

CAD Automatic process planner Automated fabrication machine

Scarificial material

Primary
material
Unconnected
region Overhanging
feature

Forms
cavity
feature Slice distance
(a) Complementary support (b) Explicit support
Note: The layer by layer concept

219
 Evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review
Abbas Azari and Sakineh Nikzad
(Lightman, 1997). The capability of both technique in
providing detailed 3D pictures of the anatomy of the area of
interest and gathering valuable data for diagnostic and
therapeutic usage has very soon stimulated many clinicians
(Chua et al., 1998; Diamantopoulos and Richardson, 2002).
It was also exciting that similar to CT scan data, MR scan
data are also computed and presented in a layer-by-layer
format.
The layer data format of 3D scanners quickly prompted the
realization that it should be possible to convert the data to be
compatible with RP machine requirements, i.e. a physical
model can be manufactured based on X-ray CT or MRI data.
It is exciting that in spite of availability of CT scanners since
1973 (Hounsfield, 1973), it was not until 1987 that this
innovative technology became available for dental application
(Schwarz et al., 1987a, b). It is also interesting that the main
motivating factor for using CT in dentistry is the science of
oral implantology (Azari and Nikzad, 2008).
RP vs medical/dental prototyping
New terms always results from progress and development;
and so the term medical rapid prototyping (MRP) has been
evolved in the late 1990s. Just as RP, the aim of MRP is to
fabricate dimensionally accurate physical models of human
anatomy derived from medical image data using a variety of
RP technologies. As in many branches of medicine, this term
has been also used in dentistry for a range of dental
specialties, including oral and maxillofacial prosthodontics
and surgery (Anderl et al., 1994; Arvier et al., 1994; DUrso
et al., 1999; Eufinger and Wehmoller, 1998; Gateno et al.,
2000; Sailer et al., 1998; Hughes et al., 2003), dental
implantology as a surgical guide or physical model
(Heckmann et al., 2001; Ganz, 2006; Lal et al., 2006;
Vrielinck et al., 2003; Ganz, 2005) and prosthodontics (Jeng
et al., 2000a, b; Bibb et al., 2006; Eggbeer et al., 2005; Wang
et al., 2002; Li et al., 2000, 2001a, b). The use of RP in dental
branches has many other benefits of which only one of them is
medical modeling construction; there are so many useful
fields in which RP can be helpful, i.e. mass production of
patterns for casting purposes. In this way, time consuming
and/or difficult parts in restoration making can be easily
implemented even without human intervention.
RP technologies used in dentistry and/or
medicine
Since inception, many RP technologies have been employed
for making medical prototypes in medicine and dentistry.
Common technologies used in dentistry are stereolithography
(SLA), inkjet-based system (3D printing 3DP), selective
laser sintering (SLS) and fused deposition modeling (FDM).
The materials that can be used are fairly diverse but, wax,
plastics, ceramics and metals are all utilized by several teams
for dental purposes.
Stereolithography
The first process of this type of RP was patented by Hull
(1984), for the production of 3D models from photopolymer
resins (Hull, 1984). This system consists of a bath of
photosensitive liquid resin, a model-building platform, and an
ultraviolet (UV) laser for curing the resin. The layers are
cured sequentially and bond together to form a solid object
220
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 15 Number 3 2009 216 225
beginning from the bottom of the model and building up.
As the resin is exposed to the UV light, a thin well-defined
layer thickness becomes hardened. After a layer of resin is
cured, the resin platform is lowered within the bath by a small
known distance. A new layer of resin is wiped across the
surface of the previous layer using a wiper blade, and this
second layer is subsequently exposed and cured. The process
of curing and lowering the platform into the resin bath is
repeated until the full model is complete. The self-adhesive
property of the material causes the layers to bond to each
other and eventually form a complete, en bloc 3D object. The
model is then removed from the bath and cured for a further
period of time in a UV cabinet (Figure 9).
This technology today is capable of producing highly
complex 3D geometries with little or no human intervention
(Hildebolt et al., 1990). The most significant advantages and
disadvantages commonly relevant to this technique are
incorporated in Table II (Hildebolt et al., 1990; Vannier
et al., 1984; Rosenfeld and Mecall, 1996; Sonic et al., 1994;
Lightman, 1997). Practically, SLA method is best for
educational purposes and rehearsing the best possible
surgical planning before surgery. This capability has been
fully demonstrated from many studies (Bajura et al., 1992;
European Commission, 2002; Wouters, 1998). There is also
some, who clearly demonstrated the possibility to use these
Figure 9 Principle of SLA
X-Y movable
UV light source
Liquid surface
Formed object
on elevator
Table II The main advantages and disadvantages of SLA technology
Advantages Disadvantages
High accuracy Expensive equipment
Close tolerance Material high cost
Good surface finish Can be used only for polymers
Can be made transparent Post-cured required
100 percent density possible
High-mechanical strength
Smooth surface finish
Fine building detail
 Evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review Rapid Prototyping Journal
Abbas Azari and Sakineh Nikzad Volume 15 Number 3 2009 216 225

systems for impression purposes in reconstructive surgeries Figure 11 Schematic of 3DP systems
and sub-periosteal dental implant surgery (Gateno et al.,
2000; Sailer et al., 1998; Golec, 1986; Truitt et al., 1988;
DUrso et al., 2000; Klein et al., 1992; James et al., 1998).
Liquid adhesive
Nowadays, the main objective for using SLA models in
supply
dentistry is fabrication of surgical drilling templates during
dental implant insertion. The high accuracy of SLA-made
surgical drill guides has been proved by several well-
documented studies (van Steenberghe et al., 2002; Sarment Ink jet head
Powder
et al., 2003; Chen et al., 2004) (Figure 10). Furthermore, the Roller bed
transparency of the model and the recent development of
color resins allow distinct visualization of anatomical
structures (Lightman, 1997).
Builded
Inkjet-based system or 3DP model
The working principle of this RP system is basically similar Powder
to the conventional 2D inkjet printer. Initially, a measured delivery Fabrication
quantity of powder is dispensed from a supply chamber by system piston
moving a piston upward incrementally. A roller then
distributes and compresses the powder at the top of the
fabrication chamber. The multi-channel jetting head Table III The main advantages and disadvantages of 3DP systems
subsequently deposits a liquid adhesive in a 2D pattern
onto the layer of the powder, which becomes bonded in the Advantages Disadvantages
areas where the adhesive is deposited, to form a layer of Fast fabrication time Large tolerance
the object. Once a layer is finished, the piston that supports Low material cost Lower strength models
the powder bed and the part lowers so that the next powder Capability of being colored Rough surface finish
layer can be spread and selectively joined. This layer-by-
Build models can be used for
layer technique is gradually continued until the prototype is
casting purposes directly
completely built up. Following a heat-treatment process,
Low toxicity
unbound powder is swept up, leaving the fabricated part
Relative material variety
intact (Lightman, 1997) (Figure 11). The larger tolerance
(0.127 mm) of output model is a problem for delicate dental
models such as casting patterns but for creating educational
models it does matter. Moreover, it seems that due to this surface of a build cylinder. Powder is deposited incrementally
high tolerance, 3DP technology is not as useful for on top of each solidified layer and sintered again. The piston
impression purposes as SLA is. There are a number of in the cylinder moves down one object layer thickness to
potential reasons for the inaccuracies; they can easily break accommodate the new layer of powder. A laser beam is then
off. This may result in additional time for precise fitting of traced over the surface of this tightly compacted powder
medical implants during surgery but, it may helpful for (Figure 12). The process is self-supporting and parts can
rehearsing surgical procedures (Gibson et al., 2006). The
therefore be nested together. The selective nature of the
advantages and disadvantages of the system demonstrated in
lasers enables complex geometries to be achieved without
Table III.
compromising on functionality (Lightman, 1997). The range
Selective laser sintering of thermoplastic materials like nylon composite, investment
SLS is a process of fusing together layers of specified powder casting wax, metallic materials, ceramics and thermoplastic
material into a 3D model by a computer-directed laser. In this composites that can be used on the SLS machine is a big
system, the powdered material is spread by a roller over the
Figure 12 Schematic of SLS technology
Figure 10 SLA made Drill guides for implant surgery
Scanner
system
Laser
Powder
bed
Roller

Powder
delivery Fabrication
Source: Materialise N.V., Leuven, Belgium system piston

221
 Evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review Rapid Prototyping Journal
Abbas Azari and Sakineh Nikzad Volume 15 Number 3 2009 216 225

advantage especially in the field of dentistry. The ability of this Figure 13 Schematic illustration of the FDM process
technology to build up removable partial denture (RPD)
frameworks has recently been demonstrated (Jeng et al.,
2000b; Bibb et al., 2006). The material used was cobalt-
chrome spherical powder with a maximum particle size of z
0.045 mm (particle size range 0.005-0.045 mm) and a mean y Thermoplastic or wax
particle size of approximately 0.030 mm. The part proved filament
successful and produced a complete cobalt-chrome RPD
framework (Bibb et al., 2006). The possibility to preheat the x Heated FDM head
SLS machines just below the temperature needed for metal moves in x-y plane
powder sintering (melting) by lasers made this system very
speedy. This minimizes thermal distortion and facilitates Plastic model
fusion to the previous layer (Kai et al., 2000). Some of the created on minutes
basic advantages and disadvantages of this RP technique are
listed in Table IV.

Fused deposition modeling

The FDM is a RP system in which a temperature-
controlled head extrudes thermoplastic material layer by
Fixtureless foundation
layer. In this technology, a filament of a thermoplastic
polymer material feeds into the temperature controlled
FDM extrusion nozzle head, where it is heated to a semi-
liquid state. The nozzle heads motion is computer
controlled and is used to trace and deposits the material
in ultra-thin layers on to a fixtureless base. The head directs
the material into place with precision. The part is built up
layer by layer and the material solidifies within 0.1 s after
being ejected from the nozzle and bonds to the layer below
Filament supply
(Figure 13). The entire system is contained within a
chamber which is held at a temperature just below the
melting point of the proposed material. The FDM process completely automated and the system can easily produce
allows a variety of modeling materials and colors, such as over 150 units per hours (www.cynovad.com/html/produits/
medical grade ABS, polycarbonates and investment casting WaxPro/etapes.htm) (Figure 14). Some of the most useful
wax (Chua, 1994). FDM can produce models, as well as features of FDM technology are represented in Table V.
surgical guides and templates, out of medical grade ABS,
which is gamma-sterilizable and translucent. ABS offers
good strength, and more recently polycarbonate and poly
(phenyl) sulfone materials have been introduced which Figure 14 Real wax-ups made by the FDM process
extend the capabilities of the method further in terms of
strength and temperature range. Superior visualization by
highlighting selected features in a different color is another
prominent feature of this technology (Lightman, 1997;
Chua et al., 1998). The mean accuracy of this technique is
about ^ 0.127 mm and currently FDM is the second most
widely used RP technology, after SLA (www.rp4baghdad.
com/technology.php?tech 4). Support structures are
fabricated for overhanging geometries and are later
removed by breaking them away from the object. A water-
soluble support material which can simply be washed away
is also available (www.rp4baghdad.com/technology.
php?tech 4). The method is office-friendly and quiet so
some manufactures produced systems exclusively for use in
dentistry. In one of them, the wax modeling process made

Table IV The basic advantages and disadvantages of SLS Systems

Advantages
Nice material variety (plastic,
metal, and ceramics)
100 percent density possible
Disadvantages
Expensive material and equipment
High tolerance for dental uses
(0.5 ^ 0.2 mm)
Source: CYNOVAD Dentalmatic Technologies Inc., Canada

222
 Evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review
Abbas Azari and Sakineh Nikzad
Table V The reported advantages and disadvantages of FDM
technologies
Advantages Disadvantages
Direct wax pattern Support structure must be removed
Multi-color part Rough surface finish
Fairly fast and speedy Thermoplastic material only
Not 100 percent dense
Further developments and future outcomes
It is noteworthy that working with RP technologies in the
medical/dental field differs considerably from using them in
the industrial environment. In manufacturing, only non-
existing models are usually virtually designed on the computer
screen and then converted to physical models. In medical
applications, the object or part to be modeled often, but not
always, exists physically (anatomical structures of the patients
body) and building medical models essentially starts with
acquiring data such as CT cross-sectional images, pre-
processing of collected data to provide a format that a CAD
package or a RP system can recognize and finally linking with
RP technologies to obtain the desired physical models.
Although several attempts have been made to further
customize the technique described above for using in
dentistry but it seems that in near future many other
methods will developed which could change the traditional
dental practices. Some of the shortcomings which must be
fully revolutionized in future are the delivery time which must
be further shortened if RP and resin manufacturers can
develop direct prototyping biomedical material, and the total
cost of the finished product must be lowered in order to be
used in everyday practice. Moreover, it is a necessity to
educate the dental team (dentists and dental laboratory
technicians) with this new technology and including further
unit hours in dental curriculums. Currently, a new project;
under the name of RP4 Baghdad was announced by
European Community which is targeted the possible
usefulness of RP in the field of medical/dental with the aim
of further develop the technology and overcome the
insufficiencies in RP technology. RP4Baghdad, launched in
May 2005 by coordination of Materialise, has focused on
serious cases involving head injuries among civilians in Iraq.
Many medical models have been produced and shipped to
Baghdad to support teams of doctors with complex
reconstructive surgeries of the head and face. Some of the
most famous companies involved in this study are listed in
Table VI.
Table VI Some of the companies work together in so-called RP4
Baghdad project
Manufacturers Address
Materialise www.materialise.com
Stratasys www.stratasys.com
Z Corporation www.zcorp.com
Medical Modeling www.medicalmodeling.com
3D Systems www.3dsystems.com
EOS www.eos.info
223
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 15 Number 3 2009 216 225
References
(The) Academy of Prosthodontics (2005), Glossary of
prosthodontic terms, J. Prosthet. Dent., Vol. 94, pp. 10-92.
Anderl, H., Zur Nedden, D., Muhlbauer, W., Twerdy, K.,
Zanon, E., Wicke, K. and Knapp, R. (1994), CT-guided
stereolithography as a new tool in craniofacial surgery,
Br. J. Plast. Surg., Vol. 47, p. 60.
Arvier, J.F., Barker, T.M., Yau, Y.Y., DUrso, P.S.,
Atkinson, R.L. and McDermant, G.R. (1994),
Maxillofacial biomodelling, Br. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg.,
Vol. 32, p. 276.
Azari, A. and Nikzad, S. (2008), Computer assisted
implantology: historical background and potential
outcomes-a review, Int. J. Med. Robotics Comput. Assist.
Surg., Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 95-104.
Bajura, M., Fuchs, H. and Ohbuchi, R. (1992), Merging
virtual objects with the real world: seeing ultrasound
imagery within the patient, Computer Graphics, Vol. 26,
pp. 203-10.
Bibb, R., Eggbeer, D. and Williams, R. (2006), Rapid
manufacture of removable partial denture frameworks,
Rapid Prototyp. J., Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 95-9.
Chang, C.C., Lee, M.Y. and Wang, S.H. (2006), Digital
denture manufacturing an integrated technologies of
abrasive computer tomography, CNC machining and rapid
prototyping, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., Vol. 31, pp. 41-9.
Chen, Y.Y., Chang, Y.L. and Shiau, Y.Y. (2004), Accuracy of
surgical drilling guide SurgiGuide system, paper presented
at the IADR/AADR/CADR 82nd General Session, Hawaii,
March, 10-13.
Christensen, G.J. (2006), Is now the time to purchase an in-
office CAD/CAM device?, J. Am. Dent. Assoc., Vol. 137,
pp. 235-8.
Chua, C.K. (1994), Three-dimensional rapid prototyping
technologies and key development areas, Computing
& Control Engineering Journal, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 200-4.
Chua, C.K., Chou, S.M., Lin, S.C., Eu, K.H. and Lew, K.F.
(1998), Biomedical applications of rapid prototyping
systems, AUTOMEDICA, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 29-40.
Diamantopoulos, P. and Richardson, J.D. (2002), Medical
rapid prototyping: the solid visualization of anatomical
structures, paper presented at 17th European Conference
on Biomaterials, Barcelona, September 1114.
Duret, F., Blouin, J.L. and Duret, B. (1988), CAD-CAM
in dentistry, J. Am. Dent. Assoc., Vol. 117, pp. 715-20.
DUrso, P.S., Earwaker, W.J., Barker, T.M., Redmond, M.J.,
Thompson, R.G., Effeney, D.J. and Tomlinson, F.H.
(2000), Custom cranioplasty using stereolithography and
acrylic, Br. J. Plast. Surg., Vol. 53, pp. 200-4.
DUrso, P.S., Barker, T.M., Earwaker, W.J., Bruce, L.J.,
Atkinson, R.L., Lanigan, M.W., Arvier, J.F. and
Effeney, D.J. (1999), Stereolithographic biomodelling
in cranio-maxillofacial surgery: a prospective trial,
J. Craniomaxillofac. Surg., Vol. 27, p. 30.
Eggbeer, D., Bibb, R. and Williams, R. (2005),
The computer aided design and rapid prototyping of
removable partial denture frameworks, Proceedings of the
Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Part H, Journal of
Engineering in Medicine, Vol. 219 No. 3, pp. 195-202.
Eufinger, H. and Wehmoller, M. (1998), Individual
prefabricated titanium implants in reconstructive
 Evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review
Abbas Azari and Sakineh Nikzad
craniofacial surgery. Clinical and technical aspects of the
first 22 cases, Plast. Reconstr. Surg., Vol. 102, p. 300.
European Commission (2002), BRITE-EURAM: Making
a Lasting Impression on Europe, Office for Official
Publications of the European Communities, Brussels.
Ganz, S.D. (2005), Presurgical planning with CT derived
fabrication of surgical guides, J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg.,
Vol. 63 No. 2, p. 65.
Ganz, S.D. (2006), Techniques for the use of CT imaging
for the fabrication of surgical guides, Atlas Oral
Maxillofacial Surg. Clin. N. Am., Vol. 14, pp. 75-97.
Gateno, J., Allen, M.E., Teichgraeber, J.F. and Messersmith,
M. (2000), An in vitro study of the accuracy of a new
protocol for planning distraction osteogenesis of the
mandible, J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg., Vol. 58, p. 985.
Gelbard, S., Aoskar, Y., Zalkind, M. and Stern, N. (1994),
Effect of impression materials and techniques on the
marginal fit of metal casting, J. Prosthet. Dent., Vol. 71,
p. 1.
Gibson, I., Cheung, L.K., Chow, S.P., Beh, S.L., Savalani, H.
and Lee, S.H. (2006), The use of rapid prototyping to
assist medical applications, Rapid Prototyp. J., Vol. 12
No. 1, pp. 53-8.
Golec, T.S. (1986), CAD-CAM multiplanar diagnostic
imaging for subperiosteal implants, Dent. Clin. North Am.,
Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 85-95.
Heckmann, S.M., Winter, W., Meyer, M., Weber, H.P. and
Wichmann, M.G. (2001), Overdenture attachment
selection and the loading of implant and denture bearing
area. Part 1: in vitro verification of stereolithographic
model, Clin. Oral Impl. Res., Vol. 12, p. 617.
Hildebolt, C.F., Vannier, M.W. and Knapp, R.H. (1990),
Validation study of skull three-dimensional computerized
tomography measurements, Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.,
Vol. 82, pp. 283-94.
Hollenback, G.M. (1962), A brief history of cast
restoration, J. South Calif. State Dent. Assoc., Vol. 30,
pp. 8-18.
Hounsfield, G.N. (1973), Computerized transverse axial
scanning (tomography) I. Description of system,
Br. J. Radiology, Vol. 46, pp. 1016-22.
Hughes, C.W., Page, K., Bibb, R., Taylor, J. and Revington, P.
(2003), The custom made orbital floor prosthesis in
reconstruction for orbital floor fractures, Br. J. Oral
Maxillofac. Surg., Vol. 41, p. 50.
Hull, C. (1984), Apparatus for the prodution of three-
dimensional objects by stereolithography, US Patent
No. 4,575,330, USPTO, Alexandria, VA.
Isenberg, B.P., Essig, M.E., Leinfelder, K.F. and
Mueninghoff, L.A. (1991), Clinical evaluation of Cerecw
CAD/CAM restorations emphasizing marginal integrity
(abstract), J. Dent. Res., Vol. 70, p. 434, (special issue).
James, W.J., Slabbekoorn, M.A., Edgin, W.A. and
Hardin, C.K. (1998), Correction of congenital malar
hypoplasia using stereolithography for presurgical
planning, J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg., Vol. 56, pp. 512-7.
Jeng, J.Y., Chang, K.Y., Dong, D.R. and Shih, H.S. (2000a),
Tooth crown fabrication using reverse engineering
technology and model maker rapid prototyping system,
Rapid Prototyp. J., Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 136-45.
Jeng, J.Y., Chen, C.Y., Chen, S. and Chen, R. (2000b),
Application of a micro-CT scan to tooth crown
dimensions measurement and CAD model construction
224
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 15 Number 3 2009 216 225
for rapid prototyping, J. Chin. Soc. Mech. Eng., Vol. 21
No. 3, pp. 321-4.
Johnston, J.F., Phillips, R.W. and Dykema, R.W. (1971),
Modern Practice in Crown and Bridge Prosthodontics, 3rd ed.,
WB Saunders, Philadelphia, PA, p. 191.
Kai, C.C., Meng, C.S., Ching, L.S., Teik, L.S. and Aung,
S.C. (2000), Facial prosthetic model fabrication using
rapid prototyping tools, Integrated Manufacturing Systems,
Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 42-53.
Kelly, J.R. (2007), Developing meaningful systematic
review of CAD/CAM reconstructions and fiber-
reinforced composites, Clin. Oral Impl. Res., Vol. 18
No. 3, pp. 205-17.
Klein, H.M., Schneider, W., Alzen, G., Voy, E.D. and
Gunther, R.W. (1992), Pediatric craniofacial surgery:
comparison of milling and stereolithography for 3D model
manufacturing, Pediatr. Radiol., Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 458-60.
Lal, K., White, G.S., Morea, D.N. and Wright, R.F. (2006),
Use of stereolithographic templates for surgical and
prosthodontic implant planning and placement. Part II.
A clinical report, J. Prosthodont., Vol. 15, pp. 117-22.
Li, X., Crocker, J., Shaw, L., Marcus, H. and Cameron, T.
(2001a), Laser densification of nickel powder for dental
restorations, Proceedings of the 2001 NSF Design,
Manufacturing & Industrial Innovation Research Conference,
Tampa, FL, January 710, pp. 1-8.
Li, X., Crocker, J., Geiss, E., Shaw, L., Marcus, H. and
Cameron, T. (2000), Evaluation of microstructure and
properties for multi-materials laser densification of dental
restorations, Proceedings of 11th Solid Freeform Fabrication
Symposium, Austin, TX, August 7-9, pp. 159-67.
Li, X., Wang, J., Augustine, A., Shaw, L., Marcus, H. and
Cameron, T. (2001b), Microstructure evaluation for laser
densification of dental porcelains, Proceedings of 12th Solid
Freeform Fabrication Symposium, Austin, TX, August 6-8,
pp. 195-202.
Lightman, A.J. (1997), Medical applications, in Prinz, F.B.
(Ed.), Rapid Prototyping in Europe and Japan, Loyola
College of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, pp. 129-35.
Liu, Q., Leu, M.C. and Schmitt, S.M. (2006), Rapid
prototyping in dentistry: technology and application,
Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., Vol. 29, pp. 317-35.
Luthardt, R.G., Loos, R. and Quaas, S. (2005), Accuracy of
intraoral data acquisition in comparison to the conventional
impression, International Journal of Computerized Dentistry,
Vol. 8, pp. 283-94.
Luthardt, R.G., Koch, R., Rudolph, H. and Walter, M.H.
(2006), Qualitative computer aided evaluation of dental
impressions in vivo, Dent. Mater., Vol. 22, pp. 66-76.
model definition (2008), Merriam-Websters Medical
Dictionary, Dictionary.com, available at: http://dictionary.
reference.com/browse/model (accessed March 8, 2008)
Morey, E.F. (1992), Dimensional accuracy of gold alloy
castings. Part 3. Gypsumbonded investment expansion,
Aust. Dent. J., Vol. 37, pp. 43-54.
Petzold, R., Zeilhofer, H.F. and Kalender, W.A. (1999),
Rapid prototyping technology in medicine-basics and
applications, Comput. Medical Imaging Graph, Vol. 23,
pp. 277-84.
Potamianos, P., Amis, A.A., Forester, A.J., McGurk, M. and
Bircher, M. (1998), Rapid prototyping for orthopaedic
surgery, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
 Evolution of rapid prototyping in dentistry: a review
Abbas Azari and Sakineh Nikzad
Engineering, Part H, J. Eng. Med., Vol. 212 No. 5,
pp. 383-93.
Rekow, E.D. (2006), Dental CAD/CAM systems; a 20-year
success story, J. Am. Dent. Assoc., Vol. 137, pp. 5-6.
Rekow, E.D., Thompson, V.P. and Yang, H.S. (1991),
Margin fit of CAD/CAM produced crowns (abstract),
J. Dent. Res., Vol. 70, p. 434 (special issue).
Rosenfeld, A. and Mecall, J.A. (1996), The use of interactive
computed tomography can predict the esthetic and
functional demands of implant-supported prostheses,
Compendium, Vol. 17 No. 12.
Sailer, H.F., Haers, P.E., Zollikofer, C.P., Warnke, T.,
Carls, F.R. and Stucki, P. (1998), The value of
stereolithographic models for preoperative diagnosis of
craniofacial deformities and planning of surgical
corrections, Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg., Vol. 27, p. 327.
Sarment, D.P., Sukovic, P. and Clinthorne, N. (2003),
Accuracy of implant placement with a stereolithographic
surgical guide, Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants, Vol. 18,
pp. 571-7.
Schwarz, M.S., Rothman, S.L.G., Rhodes, M.L. and
Chafetz, N. (1987a), Computed tomography. Part
I. Preoperative assessment of the mandible for endosseous
implants surgery, Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants, Vol. 2,
pp. 137-41.
Schwarz, M.S., Rothman, S.L.G., Rhodes, M.L. and
Chafetz, N. (1987b), Computed tomography. Part II.
Preoperative assessment of the maxilla for endosseous
implants surgery, Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants, Vol. 2,
pp. 143-8.
Sonic, M., Abrahams, J. and Faiella, R.A. (1994),
Comparison of the accuracy of periapical, panoramic
and computerized tomographic radiographs in locating the
mandibular canal, Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants, Vol. 9,
pp. 455-60.
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
225
Rapid Prototyping Journal
Volume 15 Number 3 2009 216 225
Taggart, W.H. (1907), A new and accurate method of
making gold inlays, Dent. Cosmos., Vol. 49, pp. 1117-21.
Truitt, H.P., James, R.A., Lindley, P.E. and Boyne, P. (1988),
Morphologic replication of the mandible using
computerized tomography for the fabrication of a
subperiosteal implant, Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol.,
Vol. 65 No. 5, pp. 499-504.
Vannier, M.W., Marsh, J.L. and Warren, J.O. (1984), Three-
dimensional CT reconstruction images for craniofacial
surgical planning and evaluation, Radiology, Vol. 150,
pp. 179-84.
van Steenberghe, D., Naert, I., Andersson, M., Brajnovic, I.,
van Cleynenbreugel, J. and Suetens, P. (2002), A custom
template and definitive prosthesis allowing immediate
implant loading in the maxilla: a clinical report,
Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants, Vol. 17, pp. 663-70.
Vrielinck, L., Politis, C., Schepers, S., Pauwels, M. and
Naert, I. (2003), Image-based planning and clinical
validation of zygoma and pterygoid implant placement in
patients with severe bone atrophy using customized drill
guides. Preliminary results from a prospective clinical
follow-up study, Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg., Vol. 32,
pp. 7-14.
Wang, J., Li, X., Shaw, L. and Marcus, H.L. (2002), Studies
on slurry extrusion for dental restoration, Proceedings of the
13th Annual Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, Austin,
TX, USA, August 5-7, pp. 5-7.
Weiss, L.E. (1997), Process overview, in Prinz, F.B. (Ed.),
Rapid Prototyping in Europe and Japan, Loyola College of
Maryland, Baltimore, MD, pp. 5-20.
Wouters, K. (1998), What is the PHIDIAS Network?,
Phidias Newsletter, Vol. 1.
Corresponding author
Sakineh Nikzad can be contacted at: snikzad@sina.tums.ac.ir