Review assesses 3D-printing technologies for dental models

Fraser Macdonald, Dental Tribune International

Tue. 24. February 2026

save

ATHENS, Greece: As digital workflows become more common in prosthodontics and orthodontics, choosing the right 3D-printing method for dental models is becoming a practical clinical and laboratory question. A new narrative review by researchers in Greece compares the main 3D-printing technologies used for prosthodontic and orthodontic dental models with one another and with conventional plaster casts. The paper also identifies the technologies most suitable for precise clinical applications.

The article provides a broad overview of contemporary 3D-printing technologies used to fabricate dental models: stereolithography (SLA), digital light processing (DLP), liquid crystal display printing, fused deposition modelling (FDM) and PolyJet. In terms of dimensional accuracy—a key clinical performance parameter—the article cites comparative evidence indicating that SLA, DLP and PolyJet systems demonstrate the highest precision and trueness, particularly for full-arch prosthodontic models. PolyJet often performed the best, followed closely by DLP and SLA. These technologies use photopolymer resins and can achieve fine layer thickness and high surface detail, which is advantageous for fabrication of dental models used for prosthodontic and implant work.

The review cites studies indicating that liquid crystal display printing can be less accurate, although reported differences may be considered clinically acceptable for many diagnostic and orthodontic applications. This technology, which also uses photopolymer resins, offers a lower-cost entry point for practices. In contrast, FDM printers, which extrude thermoplastic filaments and are praised for affordability and ease of use, showed lower resolution and surface quality in the studies cited in the review. As a result, they are more suited to diagnostic models, educational purposes and preliminary planning rather than high-precision prosthodontic models.

Regarding comparisons to plaster casts, several investigations reported that 3D-printed models showed reproducibility comparable to conventional casts, but minor discrepancies too were reported and clinical acceptability depends on the application. FDM and DLP, while suitable for orthodontic models for diagnostic purposes, may require caution for applications requiring extremely tight tolerances, such as aligner fabrication.

The review emphasises that accuracy is influenced by numerous variables beyond the printing technology, including material selection, layer thickness, light intensity, build orientation, software parameters and post-processing protocols. This highlights the importance of standardised workflows and operator training to ensure reliable outcomes.

Another important clinical dimension is material behaviour over time. The review notes that photopolymer resins may undergo dimensional changes due to ongoing polymerisation, moisture absorption or ageing, potentially affecting long-term accuracy. Therefore, the study recommends research into long-term stability of printed models.

The paper also points to the need for prospective clinical trials and standardised accuracy assessment protocols. It also suggests future development directions: emerging innovations such as artificial intelligence optimisation of printing parameters, environmentally considerate approaches and even 4D printing—where structures respond to environmental stimuli—may further expand clinical possibilities.

Overall, the article concluded that SLA, DLP and PolyJet technologies appear to currently be the most dependable options for 3D printing of models for high-precision prosthodontic work, supporting improved patient care and clinical outcomes. 3D printing is advancing rapidly in quality, speed and cost-efficiency, but more research is still needed to better establish its accuracy and overall benefits.

From a clinical perspective, 3D-printed models offer several advantages over traditional plaster casts. These include improved turnaround times, digital storage, enhanced communication with laboratories and patients, and the ability to reproduce models on demand without degradation. Digital models also facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration and treatment planning, particularly in complex implant and orthodontic cases.

The article, titled “3D printing techniques for dental prosthetic models: A narrative review and contemporary perspectives”, was published online on 6 February 2026 in Cureus.