Evaluation of the Processing Discrepancies Between Dental and Nondental CAD Software Using the Smoothing Design Tool


Shoulder finish line
dental CAD software
nondental CAD software
smoothing tool
processing discrepancy
Autodesk Meshmixer
Dental Wings

How to Cite

Uyar, A., Pişkin, B., Pişkin, M. A. ., Akın, H., Arısan, V., & Koçyiğit, Önder. (2022). Evaluation of the Processing Discrepancies Between Dental and Nondental CAD Software Using the Smoothing Design Tool. Acta Stomatologica Cappadocia, 2(1), 18–36. https://doi.org/10.54995/ASC.2.1.2


Statement of the problem: The advancing computer-aided design/com-puter-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology has changed the fabrica-tion protocols of fixed prosthodontic restorations dramatically in the last 25 ye-ars. Beside the dental CAD programs open source nondental software have been utilized for prosthodontic purposes. Despite the progress in technology, varying accuracy and precision rates, and lack of standardized workflows are still challenging issues.

Objective: No study to the authors' knowledge evaluated the precision of the manually used processing tools of CAD softwares despite the necessity of utilizing multiple tools to design a restoration, thus it was aimed to evaluate the processing discrepancies of smoothing procedures.

Materials & Methods: A virtual working cast of a maxilla with six teeth prepared with shoulder finish lines containing irregularities up to 50μm were composed. The irregularities were smoothed manually using the 'brush' tools in the 'sculpt' mode of the DWOS, Blender and Meshmixer softwares. Smoothed virtual working casts were superimposed with the reference virtual working cast.

Results: The results of Tukey HSD test revealed significant differences between Meshmixer and Blender (P=0.000), and Meshmixer and DWOS (P=0.000), no significance was found between DWOS and Blender values (P=0.987).

Conclusion: The results of the study pointed out that smoothing proce-dure may lead to significant differences in discrepancy values, nondental CAD software can perform smoothing with less discrepancy thus, commencing furt-her studies including multiple users and softwares for the evaluation of diffe-rent design tools seems imperative.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2022 Alper Uyar, Bülent Pişkin, Mehmet Ali Pişkin, Hakan Akın, Volkan Arısan, Önder Koçyiğit