Leading through technological innovation: a dentist's guide to strategic adoption in modern practice.

The widespread use of digital imaging can now be combined with additive three-dimensional (3D) printing, changing traditional clinical dentistry, especially in challenging cases. Visualizing the bone and soft tissue anatomy using computed tomography (CT) and intraoral scanning generated digital files that can be further processed for 3D printing. Among the popular 3D printing approaches, fused filament fabrication (FFF) and stereolithography (SLA) are broadly used due to their rapid production, precision, and ease of use. The current case series outlines three challenging clinical scenarios where a combination of CT and intraoral scans were utilized for digital planning. FFF multicolor anatomical models and SLA surgical guides were produced using 3D printing technology. The first case outlines the utility of this approach to place the optimal surgical window at the lateral sinus lift with anticipated difficult access. In the second case, distinct sites for autogenous bone harvesting were identified while preserving critical adjacent structures with surgical simulation. Finally, the third case outlines this strategy for optimal surgical access to expose an impacted second premolar. Both clinicians and patients benefited from the educational use of FFF‒SLA 3D-printed models, and all cases were successfully treated without complications. These cases demonstrate the significant utility of these digital technologies and rapid prototyping for improved pre-surgical planning, patient motivation, and didactic training that contribute to improved quality of clinical care. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first case reports employing both fused filament fabrication (FFF) and stereolithography (SLA) printing techniques in dental surgery. This innovative approach addresses a range of clinically challenging scenarios presented in this report. Computed tomography (CT) and intraoral scanning are essential for three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction. Specialized software is required to design the guide with precise specifications, and FFF and SLA printers are necessary for fabricating the 3D model. Three-dimensional reconstruction can be time-intensive, particularly when manual segmentation is necessary. Acquiring proficiency in the software may require additional time, and multicolor 3D printing also demands extended printing durations. This study explores how digital imaging and three-dimensional (3D) printing can improve complex dental surgeries. Using tools such as computed tomography scans and intraoral scans, dentists can create detailed 3D models of a patient's bone and soft tissues. Two popular 3D printing methods-fused-filament fabrication (FFF) and stereolithography (SLA)-were used to make these models, which help with surgical planning. The study includes three cases where 3D-printed models were used to prepare for difficult dental procedures. In the first case, the 3D model helped plan the best way to access a difficult area for sinus surgery. The second case used the model to identify the best sites for bone harvesting. The third case used the model to plan how to safely expose an impacted tooth. These helped both the dentist and the patient understand the procedure better. All surgeries were successful, demonstrating how FFF and SLA 3D printing enhance planning, making advanced dental surgeries safer and more efficient.

This study aimed to assess the reproducibility of linear measurements performed in dental models produced via intraoral scanning and three-dimensional (3D) printing using digital light processing (DLP) and fused deposition modeling (FDM). A sample of 22 participants was selected for this study. Intraoral scanning was performed in each participant with TRIOS™ (3Shape A/S™, Copenhagen, Denmark) device. The digital models were 3D printed using DLP and FDM techniques. Using a caliper, intraoral linear measurements were performed in situ (on the surface of participant’s teeth) and on the 3D printed models. The measurements taken intraoral and on the models were compared using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). The correlation between measurements taken in situ and on DLP models was poor (<0.4), while between in situ and FDM it ranged from poor to satisfactory (<0.75). Generalized linear model showed that the differences did not reach statistically significant levels (p>0.05). According to Bland-Altman approach, the size of measurements did not bias the outcomes. The intraoral scanning and 3D printing techniques used in this study enabled the reproducibility of linear measurements, however, discrete distortions that might be clinically significant occurred.

The technology of three-dimensional (3D) printing was commercialized in the late 1980s. Since then, the development of this technology has been dramatically increasing. Moreover, 3D printing technology has been used in many different fields, such as electronics and medical appliances, because 3D printing is a technological convergence based on precision instruments, chemical materials, and electrical equipment. The technological impact of 3D printing is so powerful that we need to analyze 3D printing technology to understand the 3D printing industry. In addition, we want more analytical results for understanding the sustainability of 3D printing technology. Thus, we compare the technologies between 3D printing competitors to find their technological innovations and evolution from a technological sustainability. To analyze the 3D printing technology, we propose a new methodology of statistical technology analysis combing social network analysis with time series clustering. In our case study, we make a comparison between “3D Systems” and “Stratasys”, two major 3D printing companies, because they have been leading the sustainable technologies of 3D printing in the market. We illustrate how the proposed methodology can be applied to practical problems from the case study. This paper contributes to the sustainable technology management, and our research can expand to other competitors with diverse technological fields as well as 3D printing.

Aim: To systematically evaluate the clinical outcomes of digital dentistry technologies - computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM), three-dimensional (3D) printing, and artificial intelligence (AI) - in the rehabilitation of tooth defects, compared to conventional techniques. Materials and Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library (up to mid-2025) identified clinical studies on CAD/CAM, 3D-printed dental prostheses, and AI in tooth restoration. Studies reporting survival, complications, patient outcomes, and diagnostic accuracy were included. Thirty-two studies (≈1580 patients) met inclusion criteria; 25 were included in quantitative synthesis. The five-year survival of CAD/CAM restorations was ~90%, comparable to conventional crowns. Milled and 3D-printed dentures showed similar satisfaction, with milled types offering better fit and fewer adjustments. Digital workflows shortened production time and reduced costs. AI models detected caries with ~85% sensitivity and ~90% specificity, and AI-based implant planning matched expert accuracy while cutting planning time (≈10 min vs 30 min). No safety issues were reported. Conclusions: Digital dentistry (CAD/CAM, 3D printing) achieves high-quality, durable restorations (~90% five-year survival) with greater efficiency and lower cost than conventional methods. AI tools show strong potential for accurate, time-saving diagnostics and treatment planning. Overall, digital methods are safe, effective, and suitable for clinical integration. Further long-term studies, especially on AI-driven workflows and 3D-printed materials, are recommended to confirm sustained outcomes and establish evidence-based standards.

Digital transformation has become a buzzword across many industries, and the dental field is no exception. Based on electronic health data, digital transformation is acknowledged as one of the biggest game-changers of the twenty-first century, tackling both current and future challenges in dental and oral healthcare. A novel method for addressing today’s major healthcare issues, such as an ageing population with a higher incidence of chronic diseases and higher lifetime treatment costs, is offered by the utilization of digital tools and apps. Health care providers may improve patient satisfaction, develop loyalty and trust, and streamline operations with the aid of digitalization. The trend of digitalization has also been influenced and nurtured by the social and cultural habits of civilised society in industrialised nations. These behaviours include urbanism, centralization, mobility, and constant accessibility through the use of smartphones, tablets, and the internet of things (IoT). In order to ensure transparency for all parties involved—including patients, healthcare providers, universities and research institutions, the medtech industry, insurance, the public media, and state policy— digital dentistry necessitates managing expectations in a more pragmatic and realistic manner. It is not to be construed that digital smart data technology will eventually take the place of people who can provide dental competence and patient empathy. The dental team in charge of digital applications is still crucial to patient care and will always be so. Many difficulties arise in the process of gathering, storing, and analysing digital biological patient data. Safeguarding patient data for optimal safety requires not just technical considerations for managing massive volumes of data, but also adherence to globally established norms and ethical guidelines.1 There are four main categories that best describe the advantages of digital dental technologies in Prosthodontics. The first and foremost is improved communication. Dental laboratory staff, patients, dentists, and other stakeholders may all communicate clearly with the help of computerized patient records. Furthermore, digital radiographs and pictures depicting intraoral conditions improve the information exchange between medical professionals and patients. One of the main benefits of integrated electronic patient records is error-free, real-time communication. Enhanced record keeping, data fidelity, workflow efficiency, and therapeutic outcomes are among the benefits of increased quality. Real-time clinical improvement is made possible by intraoral scanning of tooth preparations that are examined in highly contrasted, magnified fields on a computer screen while the patient is in direct view. Data archiving for specific patients is the third benefit. The following are some benefits of using 3-D archived diagnostic casts: a) long-lasting images without causing damage or loss to the original casts; b) allowing the images to be interfaced with other images for analysis using cutting-edge analytical and design tools; c) removing human error; and d) reduced costs for storage. The fourth and most significant advantage of digital technology in Prosthodontics is its favourable effect on patient satisfaction. More advanced treatment plans are driven by the enhanced diagnostic data. Several factors, such as time constraints, IT support costs, a lack of basic computer skills, disruptions to workflow, privacy and security concerns, interprofessional and intersystem connections, and technical and expert support, are impeding the adoption of digital technology in Prosthodontics.2,3 Several digital processes for production processing in Prosthodontics have already been incorporated into treatment procedures, particularly in the quickly expanding fields of rapid prototyping (RP) and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacture (CAD/ CAM). Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have created new opportunities for automated processing in radiological imaging. Furthermore, the technology underlying the superimposition of various imaging files to create virtual dentistry patients and non-invasive simulations comparing various outcomes before any clinical intervention is known as augmented and virtual reality, or AR/VR. These exciting new technologies—whose potential applications are still up in the air—have been made conceivable by increased IT capability.1,2,3 The process of rapidly and autonomously creating three-dimensional (3D) models of a finished product or a component of a whole using 3D printers is known as rapid prototyping. Complex 3D geometries can be produced at a reasonable cost with minimal material waste, thanks to the additive manufacturing technique. The workpiece is virtually sliced into multiple two dimensional layers. The tool-path is then generated by the AM machine in both the x and y dimensions. A three-dimensional component is formed by sequentially depositing each material layer on top of the other. The foundation of this novel approach is the slicing of a three-dimensional CAD model into numerous thin layers, which are then built one after the other by manufacturing machinery using the geometric data. Dental technology can benefit greatly from RP’s mass manufacture of dental models and its ability to fabricate implant surgical guides. Large-scale, simultaneous production in a repeatable, standardized manner is highly advantageous from an economic perspective.4 Augmented reality, or AR, is an interactive technology that uses computer-animated perceptual data to enhance a real-world experience. Stated differently, augmented reality is the addition of virtual content to the physical world. Usually, it involves superimposing extra digital data on real-time pictures or movies. In contrast, virtual reality relies solely on artificial, non-reality-connected computerized settings. Every imaginable form of sensation, primarily visual, aural, and haptic, can be employed alone or in any combination, depending on the technique. In addition to several fascinating advancements for patients and healthcare professionals, AR/VR technologies are currently finding a growing number of applications in the field of Prosthodontics as a whole.5,6 Artificial Intelligence has come a long way in the last ten years. The field of Prosthodontics is about to benefit from the most intriguing AI applications that are just around the corner. Though AI is developing quickly, it will never be able to fully replace human intelligence, skill, or capacity to make decisions. Artificial Intelligence (AI) in prosthodontics is growing exponentially. The implementation’s results are on par with, and sometimes even better than, those of humans. AI can be seen as a potential tool in every area, including the identification of marginal lines, the classification of denture fixtures and maxillofacial prosthesis, and the reduction of human error in implant cementation. Furthermore, AI cannot take the role of human knowledge, skill, or treatment planning; it can only support clinicians in carrying out their responsibilities in a professional manner. AI is generally recognized as a great tool for Prosthodontists, despite the fact that there are still obstacles to be addressed, including data collection, interpretation, computing power, and ethical issues. With careful design and long-term clinical validation, AI can be transparent, unbiased, repeatable, and user-friendly.7,8 Future research should emphasize the connection between oral and general health in order to concentrate on patient-centered outcomes and personalized therapy. Research in Prosthodontics ought to be useful to society in this context. It shouldn’t only produce papers for scientific journals; instead, it should aim to improve clinical protocols. Research and development in material science and related technical applications aim to preserve tooth structures with early diagnosis, repair of dental conditions to attain aesthetics, function with high degree of predictability, along with fewer appointments. Digital technology has a significant impact on patient motivation, clinical aspects, laboratory procedures, student training, practice management, and research.

The evolution of endodontic practice is witnessing a paradigm shift toward precision and minimally invasive interventions. Guided endodontics, empowered by advancements in three-dimensional (3D) printing and digital imaging, has transformed the way access cavities are planned and executed. Conventional access approaches can sometimes lead to excessive removal of dentin, prompting interest in more conservative techniques. With the integration of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), intraoral scanning, and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM), clinicians can now visualize internal root anatomy preoperatively and fabricate patient-specific guides that direct access burs with high accuracy. This study explores the technological foundation, clinical applications, and limitations of 3D-printed guided endodontic systems, emphasizing their role in preserving critical tooth structure and improving treatment predictability. It also discusses the future potential of artificial intelligence (AI) and real-time navigation systems in enhancing clinical precision and accessibility.

There has been a tremendous increase in the investigations of three-dimensional (3D) printing for biomedical and pharmaceutical applications, and drug delivery in particular, ever since the US FDA approved the first 3D printed medicine, SPRITAM® (levetiracetam) in 2015. Three-dimensional printing, also known as additive manufacturing, involves various manufacturing techniques like fused-deposition modeling, 3D inkjet, stereolithography, direct powder extrusion, and selective laser sintering, among other 3D printing techniques, which are based on the digitally controlled layer-by-layer deposition of materials to form various geometries of printlets. In contrast to conventional manufacturing methods, 3D printing technologies provide the unique and important opportunity for the fabrication of personalized dosage forms, which is an important aspect in addressing diverse patient medical needs. There is however the need to speed up the use of 3D printing in the biopharmaceutical industry and clinical settings, and this can be made possible through the integration of modern technologies like artificial intelligence, machine learning, and Internet of Things, into additive manufacturing. This will lead to less human involvement and expertise, independent, streamlined, and intelligent production of personalized medicines. Four-dimensional (4D) printing is another important additive manufacturing technique similar to 3D printing, but adds a 4th dimension defined as time, to the printing. This paper aims to give a detailed review of the applications and principles of operation of various 3D printing technologies in drug delivery, and the materials used in 3D printing, and highlight the challenges and opportunities of additive manufacturing, while introducing the concept of 4D printing and its pharmaceutical applications.

The primary objective of this study was to compare the accuracy and time efficiency of an indirect and direct digitalization workflow with that of a three-dimensional (3D) printer in order to identify the most suitable method for orthodontic use. A master model was measured with a coordinate measuring instrument. The distances measured were the intercanine width, the intermolar width, and the dental arch length. Sixty-four scans were taken with each of the desktop scanners R900 and R700 (3Shape), the intraoral scanner TRIOS Color Pod (3Shape), and the Promax 3D Mid cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) unit (Planmeca). All scans were measured with measuring software. One scan was selected and printed 37 times on the D35 stereolithographic 3D printer (Innovation MediTech). The printed models were measured again using the coordinate measuring instrument. The most accurate results were obtained by the R900. The R700 and the TRIOS intraoral scanner showed comparable results. CBCT-3D-rendering with the Promax 3D Mid CBCT unit revealed significantly higher accuracy with regard to dental casts than dental impressions. 3D printing offered a significantly higher level of deviation than digitalization with desktop scanners or an intraoral scanner. The chairside time required for digital impressions was 27% longer than for conventional impressions. Conventional impressions, model casting, and optional digitization with desktop scanners remains the recommended workflow process. For orthodontic demands, intraoral scanners are a useful alternative for full-arch scans. For prosthodontic use, the scanning scope should be less than one quadrant and three additional teeth.

The rapid evolution of digital technology has fundamentally changed the landscape of preventive dentistry, ushering in a new era of innovation with tools like digital radiographs, 3D printing, intraoral scanners, augmented and virtual reality, artificial intelligence, teledentistry, internet of dental things, and mobile applications. This chapter aims to analyze the transformation of preventive dentistry through digital innovations, examining the revolutionary impact of technological tools on the approach to oral disease prevention. By conducting a narrative review of articles in both English and Spanish sourced from reputable databases such as Pubmed, Google Scholar, and SciELO spanning from 2019 to June 2024, the potential of digital technologies in revolutionizing oral health management is highlighted. An analysis of how these technological tools are reshaping the delivery of preventive dental care showcases the boundless opportunities that digital advancements bring to the field of dentistry.

ObjectiveThe evidence on the accuracy of bite registration using intraoral scanners is sparse. This study aimed to develop a new method for evaluating bite registration accuracy using intraoral scanners.MethodsTwo different types of models were used; 10 stone models and 10 with acrylic resin teeth. A triangular frame with cylindrical posts at each apex (one anterior and two posteriors) was digitally designed and manufactured using three-dimensional (3D) printing. Such a structure was fitted in the lingual space of each maxillary and mandibular model so that, in occlusion, the posts would contact their opposing counterparts, enforcing a small interocclusal gap between the two arches. This ensured no tooth interference and full contact between opposing posts. Bite registration accuracy was evaluated by measuring the distance between opposing posts, with small values indicating high-accuracy. Three intraoral scanners were used Medit i500, Primescan, and Trios 4. Viewbox software was used to measure the distance between opposing posts and compute roll and pitch.ResultsThe average maximum error in interocclusal registration exceeded 50 μm. Roll and pitch orientation errors ranged above 0.1 degrees, implying an additional interocclusal error of around 40 μm or more. The models with acrylic teeth exhibited higher errors.ConclusionsA method that avoids the need for reference hardware and the imprecision of locating reference points on tooth surfaces, and offers simplicity in the assessment of bite registration with an intraoral scanner, was developed. These results suggest that intraoral scanners may exhibit clinically significant errors in reproducing the interocclusal relationships.

Three-dimensional (3D) printing has become an emerging technology in dentistry, and specifically in endodontics. This technology enables the creation of highly accurate and patient-specific 3D models, surgical guides, and custom-made instruments that have revolutionized endodontic treatment. This abstract provides an overview of the applications of 3D printing in endodontics, including preoperative planning, fabrication of surgical guides, production of custom-made instruments, and postoperative evaluation. The accuracy and precision of 3D-printed models have shown to improve the quality of endodontic treatment and reduce the risk of complications. The creation of new dental models is made possible by three-dimensional printing. 3D-printed teeth have been used in a lot of studies, however standards for standardised research are still being created. Although they have significant disadvantages, using real teeth is still the norm in ex vivo investigations and pre-clinical training. All the restrictions of natural teeth may be overcome by printed teeth. Printing technology uses 3D data and post-processing tools to create a 3D model, which is then used by 3D printers to create a prototype. The hardness of the resin and the correctness of the canal anatomy printing are the main issues with 3D-printed teeth. Future research is given direction in order to address the issues with 3D-printed teeth and create defined protocols in order to attain method standardisation. In the future, ex vivo investigations and endodontic training could use 3D-printed teeth as the gold standard. Furthermore, 3D printing has also facilitated communication between the dental team and the patient, leading to a better understanding of the treatment plan and enhancing the patient experience. This review intends to gather information regarding 3D-printed teeth on the following themes: (1) their benefits; (2) their manufacturing processes; (3) their issues; and (4) potential future research topics. In conclusion, 3D printing has the potential to enhance the accuracy and efficiency of endodontic treatment and improve clinical outcomes.

Oral soft tissue lesions encompass a wide spectrum of conditions, from benign alterations to potentially malignant disorders and malignancies. Accurate diagnosis and continuous monitoring are vital for timely intervention and improved prognosis. Current diagnostic techniques, visual and tactile examination, two-dimensional (2D) clinical photography, and histopathological analysis when required, remain indispensable but have notable limitations. Visual inspection is subjective, 2D photography cannot reliably capture volumetric or surface-texture changes, and biopsies are invasive and impractical for routine follow-up. This narrative review synthesizes existing evidence on intraoral scanning (IOS) technologies in dentistry and explores their potential application in the documentation and monitoring of oral soft tissue lesions. A narrative literature review was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and Embase databases up to September 20, 2025. Search terms included “intraoral scanner”, “oral soft tissue”, “oral lesions”, “3D imaging”, and “teledentistry”. Studies describing IOS applications in general dentistry, specialty practice, or soft-tissue imaging were included. Relevant findings were thematically analyzed to assess the feasibility of IOS in oral medicine. IOS offers objective, reproducible, and non-invasive three-dimensional (3D) data acquisition, enabling volumetric lesion monitoring, digital record-keeping, telemedicine integration, and potential artificial intelligence (AI)-based analysis. However, technical limitations persist, including motion artifacts, saliva interference, restricted depth penetration, and difficulty capturing highly mobile mucosa. Importantly, no studies to date have directly evaluated IOS for diagnosing oral soft tissue lesions. Integrating high-resolution 3D IOS into oral medicine could enable accurate, repeatable, and non-invasive documentation of soft tissue lesions, supporting longitudinal assessment, diagnosis, patient education, and teleconsultation. Nonetheless, further research addressing training requirements, cost-effectiveness, soft-tissue imaging optimization, and scanner resolution is essential before clinical adoption.

The realm of precision medicine, particularly its application within various sectors, shines notably in neuroradiology, where it leverages the advancements of three-dimensional (3D) printing technology. This synergy has significantly enhanced surgical planning, fostered the creation of tailor-made medical apparatus, bolstered medical pedagogy, and refined targeted therapeutic delivery. This review delves into the contemporary advancements and applications of 3D printing in neuroradiology, underscoring its pivotal role in refining surgical strategies, augmenting patient outcomes, and diminishing procedural risks. It further articulates the utility of 3D-printed anatomical models for enriched comprehension, simulation, and educational endeavors. In addition, it illuminates the horizon of bespoke medical devices and prosthetics, illustrating their utility in addressing specific cranial and spinal anomalies. This narrative extends to scrutinize how 3D printing underpins precision medicine by offering customized drug delivery mechanisms and therapies tailored to the patient's unique medical blueprint. It navigates through the inherent challenges of 3D printing, including the financial implications, the need for procedural standardization, and the assurance of quality. Prospective trajectories and burgeoning avenues, such as material and technological innovations, the confluence with artificial intelligence, and the broadening scope of 3D printing in neurosurgical applications, are explored. Despite existing hurdles, the fusion of 3D printing with neuroradiology heralds a transformative era in precision medicine, poised to elevate patient care standards and pioneer novel surgical paradigms.

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of data obtained from two intraoral scanners and models fabricated using two 3D printers for maxillary unilateral partial edentulism in vivo. Methods: The working models were obtained from 20 different participants. The reference datasets were acquired using irreversible hydrocolloid impression material. Two distinct intraoral scanner systems were evaluated: Cerec Omincam (Dentsply Sirona Dental GmBH, Salzburg, Austria) and 3Shape Trios (3Shape Dental Systems, Copenhagen, Denmark). Additionally, data extracted from intraoral scanners of cast models with four unilateral missing teeth in the posterior region of the maxillary arch, classified as Kennedy Class III, were obtained using 3D printers with two different production techniques. The Solflex 650 (W2P, Klosterneuburg, Austria), a 3D printer utilizing DLP technique, used Varseo Wax resin (Bego, Bremen, Germany), while the AccuFab-L4D (Shinning, Hangzhou, China), a 3D printer utilizing LCD technique, used Shinning brand resin. Deviation analysis was conducted to assess accuracy using Geomagic 3D image processing software. Statistical analysis was performed using t-test and Kruskal-Wallis test (P < 0.05). Results: No significant differences were observed in the accuracy of digital impressions among intraoral scanners and 3D printers. However, a significant difference was noted in the z coordinates across all groups where digital production techniques were applied. The highest accuracy value was observed in the model produced with the Trios intraoral scanner and AccuFab-L4D 3D printer, while the lowest accuracy value was found in the model produced with the Cerec intraoral scanner and Solflex 650 3D printer. Conclusion: The cast models obtained with intraoral scanners and 3D printers in the Kennedy Class III cases demonstrated potential as viable alternatives to study models obtained through conventional techniques.

Dentistry is truly a great profession and recently it is coming to the terms of use of technology and tech-savvy dentists, who nowadays use smart devices to make their life easier. Researchers are constantly innovating to integrate techno-logy into dentistry. Of all the latest technological innovations in dentistry, the most talked about innovations are three-dimensional (3D) printing and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), which have made the treatment planning and execution a whole lot easier. Three-dimensional printing like CBCT has been gaining much popularity in the masses. Three-dimensional printing technologies are evolving rapidly in the recent years and can be used with a wide array of different materials. In addition to rapid prototyping, the dominant use in the past, they are now being used in all manner of manufacturing applications in a diversity of industries such as sports goods, fashion items such as jewelry and necklaces to aerospace components, tools for automobile industry, and medical implants also in dentistry for producing models, making scaffolds, etc. In future, 3D printing has ability to change the way many products are manufactured and produced and bring an era of ‘personal manufacturing’. This article introduces 3D printing and gives little information about the technology behind the working of 3D printers. It also gives information about the applications of 3D printers and materials most often used for 3D printed scaffolds for periodontal regeneration.