Aim:

To compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of cost-accessible three-dimensional (3D) printed models.

Methods:

A maxillary typodont (MM) was scanned and printed 10 times in polylactic acid, resulting in 10 digital models (DMs). Polyvinylsiloxane impressions were made to obtain 10 conventional stone models (SMs). All models were scanned and imported to CloudCompare software. The total area and three locations of interest were evaluated (zenith to incisal [Z-I], canine to canine [C-C], and first molar to canine [1M-C] distances). Total area evaluations were performed by aligning the MM and experimental models using the best-fit algorithm and were compared using the Haussdorf distance. The distances between points of interest were measured using the point-picking tool at the same 3D coordinates. The mean volumetric deviations were considered for trueness analysis. Precision was set as the standard deviation. Statistical differences were evaluated using the Student’s t-test.

Results:

Total area volumetric comparisons showed that DMs showed superior trueness and precision (-0.02 ± 0.03) compared to the SMs (0.37 ± 0.29) (P < 0.001). No differences between the models were observed for Z-I (P = .155); however, SMs showed fewer deviations for C-C (P = .035) and 1M-C (P = .001) than DMs.

Conclusions:

The DMs presented superior trueness and precision for total area compared to the SMs; however, the SMs were more accurate when points of interest were evaluated