###### Abstract  
Various three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies are commercially available on the market, but the influence of different technologies on the accuracy of implant-guided surgery is unclear. Thus, three printing technologies: Stereolithographic (SLA), Digital light processing (DLP), and Polyjet were evaluated in this study. An entire 30 polyurethane models replicated the clinical situation. Ten surgical guides were printed by SLA, DLP, and Polyjet. Then, implant-guided surgery was performed, and their accuracy outcomes were measured concerning angular deviation, 3D deviation at the entry point, and apex. On top of that, the total processing time was also compared. For the angular deviation, the mean deviation was not statistically significant among all technologies. For the 3D deviation, Polyjet was statistically more accurate than DLP (\(p=0.002\)) and SLA (\(p=0.017\)) at the entry point. Polyjet was also statistically more accurate than DLP (\(p=0.007\)) in regards to 3D deviation at the apex. Within the limitation of this study, the deviations from the experiment showed that Polyjet had the best outcome regarding the 3D deviations at the entry point and at the apex, meanwhile, the DLP printer had the shortest processing time. guidelines, digital light processing, multiple  
are as follows: to begin, the 3D virtual model of surgical guides is designed with CAD software. Afterwards, the 3D virtual model is converted into slices with the uniform thickness as a so-called layer height. In the subsequent stage, the 3D model is printed physically from the bottom-up, slice by slice. Finally, post-processing of the 3D printed model is conducted to ensure that the products had the desired quality with the steps such as curing and polishing [4]. There are various additive technologies available in the market such as SLA, DLP, and Polyjet. The production processes of all technologies are very similar in principle; however, all of them can produce different results significantly. Typically, SLA technology uses UV laser beams to polymerize a liquid resin into a solid part. The model is immersed in a chemical bath for cleaning after printing. Unlike SLA, the Polyjet printer uses an inkjet-like print head jetting photopolymer droplets, and UV light is subsequently used to solidify the polymer to form a 3D model. Lastly, the DLP technology, which is similar to the SLA technology, uses a digital projector instead of UV laser beams to solidify a liquid resin [5]. Several studies measured the accuracy of each 3D printing technology, concerning the capability to reconstruct the virtual 3D models into the exact physical surgical guides [6; 7; 8; 9]. In the dental field, the common measurement to evaluate the accuracy includes the deviation of angle, entry point, and apex, which are influenced by layer thickness, material quality, cast orientation, 3D model shape, and software and hardware capabilities. Although the effect of each printing factor currently remains unclear, especially in dentistry, many of them can be controlled by the user to ensure the finest quality of a printed model. For guided implant surgery, the introduction of the desktop 3D printer enables the clinicians to fabricate surgical guides in an office [10]. A clinician could produce a surgical guide using a 3D printer, but the technique needs to be improved further to enhance the guide's stability during the surgery. However, those shortcomings have later been solved. By increasing the accuracy of the 3D-printed guide, studies proved that surgical guides were suitable for clinical use. Even though static guided implant surgery increases efficiency, it imposes several uncertainties, especially the risk of inaccuracies occurred during each step [11]. The precision of guided implant surgery is defined as the measured deviation of the superimposition between the virtual and actual implant positions [12].