Comparison of Accuracy in Digital Implant Impression using Dedicated and Compatible Scanbodies
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of digital implant impressions using two different types of scanbodies for the same implant. Materials and Methods: Four implants (TS III) were inserted in the second premolar and the first molar edentulous areas on a mandibular acrylic resin dentiform. Reference digital images were obtained through a dental model scanner (S600 ARTI model scanner) after connecting their own digital scanbodies for the implants. Experimental intraoral scanner images were acquired using the Trios® scanner with both Zirconzhan’s own scanbodies for the implants and compatible scanbodies (Dio scan adapter 01). The experimental groups were categorized into eight groups (T1-T4, NT1- NT4) according to position of the implant, existence of the second molar and scanbody type. Digital images of the experimental group were matched with the reference images using the optimal matching algorithm of a 3D image analysis program (Geomagic Design X 2014), and scanning errors were calculated. Independent two sample t-test was applied to assess the significance between the two experimental groups (α = .05). Results: Average error values in Groups T1-NT4 were 0.87 ± 0.46 um, 4.86 ± 3.08 um, 4.64 ± 1.94 um, 3.80 ± 2.76 um, 4.34 ± 2.45 um, 16.80 ± 4.98 um, 7.51 ± 1.09 um, and 12.96 ± 3.74 um respectively. Statistically significant differences were found corresponding to the second premolar edentulous area according to the scanbodies. Statistically significant differences were found in both the second premolar and first molar edentulous areas depending on the presence of the most posterior tooth. Conclusion: Using compatible scanbodies to take a digital impression of an implant can be an effective alternative to using a dedicated scanbody for the implant.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of digital implant impressions using two different types of scanbodies for the same implant. Materials and Methods: Four implants (TS III) were inserted in the second premolar and the first molar edentulous areas on a mandibular acrylic resin dentiform. Reference digital images were obtained through a dental model scanner (S600 ARTI model scanner) after connecting their own digital scanbodies for the implants. Experimental intraoral scanner images were acquired using the Trios® scanner with both Zirconzhan’s own scanbodies for the implants and compatible scanbodies (Dio scan adapter 01). The experimental groups were categorized into eight groups (T1-T4, NT1- NT4) according to position of the implant, existence of the second molar and scanbody type. Digital images of the experimental group were matched with the reference images using the optimal matching algorithm of a 3D image analysis program (Geomagic Design X 2014), and scanning errors were calculated. Independent two sample t-test was applied to assess the significance between the two experimental groups (α = .05). Results: Average error values in Groups T1-NT4 were 0.87 ± 0.46 um, 4.86 ± 3.08 um, 4.64 ± 1.94 um, 3.80 ± 2.76 um, 4.34 ± 2.45 um, 16.80 ± 4.98 um, 7.51 ± 1.09 um, and 12.96 ± 3.74 um respectively. Statistically significant differences were found corresponding to the second premolar edentulous area according to the scanbodies. Statistically significant differences were found in both the second premolar and first molar edentulous areas depending on the presence of the most posterior tooth. Conclusion: Using compatible scanbodies to take a digital impression of an implant can be an effective alternative to using a dedicated scanbody for the implant.
참고문헌 (20)
- Jemt T, "Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prostheses supported by Branemark implants in edentulous jaws : a study of treatment from the time of prosthesis placement to the first annual checkup", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 6, pp.270~276 (1991)
- Ramsey CD, "Utilization of digital technologies for fabrication of definitive implantsupported restorations", J Esthet Restor Dent, 24, pp.299~308 (2012)
- Miguel S, "Fully digital workflow, integrating dental scan, smile design and CAD-CAM : case report", BMC Oral Health, 18, pp.134~ (2018)
- Lee SJ, "Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions", Clin Oral Implants Res, 26, pp.715~719 (2015)
- Papaspyridakos P, "Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients : accuracy outcomes", Clin Oral Impl Res, 27, pp.465~472 (2016)
- Ender A, "Accuracy of complete-and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro", Int J Comput Dent, 22, pp.11~19
- Hidemichi K, "Accuracy and practicality of intraoral scanner in dentistry : A literature review", J Prosthodontic Res, 64, pp.109~113 (2020)
- Ender A, "In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods of obtaining complete-arch dental impressions", J Prosthet Dent, 115, pp.313~320 (2016)
- Andriessen FS, "Applicability and accuracy of an intraoral scanner for scanning multiple implants in edentulous mandibles : A pilot study", J Prosthet Dent, 111, pp.186~194 (2014)
- Sun, "Reproducibility of an intraoral scanner : A comparison between in-vivo and ex-vivo scans", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 154, pp.305~310 (2018)
- Mizumoto RM, "Intraoral scanbodies in implant dentistry : A systematic review", J Prosthet Dent, 120, pp.343~352 (2018)
- Shim JS, "Effect of software version and parameter settings on the marginal and internal adaptation of crowns fabricated with the CAD", CAM system, 2015, pp.23, 515~522
- Choi BH, "Digital flapless implantology", pp.32~51 (2015), JeeSung Publishing Co
- Barbero BR, "Comparative study of different digitization techniques and their accuracy", Comput Aided Des, 43, pp.188~206 (2011)
- Rudolph H, "Matching point clouds : limits and possibilities", Int J Comput Dent, 5, pp.155~164 (2002)
- Li H, "Influence of object translucency on the scanning accuracy of a powderfree intraoral scanner : a laboratory study", J Prosthet Dent, 177, pp.93~101 (2017)
- Kurz M, "Influence of material surface on the scanning error of a powder-free 3D measuring system", Clin Oral Investig, 19, pp.2035~2043 (2015)
- Chan DC, "The accuracy of optical scanning : influence of convergence and die preparation", Oper Dent, 36, pp.486~491 (2011)
- Lee, KM, "Comparison of two intraoral scanners based on three-dimensional surface analysis", Prog Orthod, 19, pp.6~ (2018)
- Yuzbasioglu E, "Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques : evaluation of patient’s perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes", BMC Oral Health, 14, pp.1~7 (2014)