Use of measuring gauges for in vivo accuracy analysis of intraoral scanners: a pilot study
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
PURPOSE. The purpose of this study is to present a methodology to evaluate the accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOS) used in vivo . MATERIALS AND METHODS. A specific feature-based gauge was designed, manufactured, and measured in a coordinate measuring machine (CMM), obtaining reference distances and angles. Then, 10 scans were taken by an IOS with the gauge in the patient’s mouth and from the obtained stereolithography (STL) files, a total of 40 distances and 150 angles were measured and compared with the gauge’s reference values. In order to provide a comparison, there were defined distance and angle groups in accordance with the increasing scanning area: from a short span area to a complete-arch scanning extension. Data was analyzed using software for statistical analysis. RESULTS. Deviations in measured distances showed that accuracy worsened as the scanning area increased: trueness varied from 0.018 ± 0.021 mm in a distance equivalent to the space spanning a four-unit bridge to 0.106 ± 0.08 mm in a space equivalent to a complete arch. Precision ranged from 0.015 ± 0.03 mm to 0.077 ± 0.073 mm in the same two areas. When analyzing angles, deviations did not show such a worsening pattern. In addition, deviations in angle measurement values were low and there were no calculated significant differences among angle groups. CONCLUSION. Currently, there is no standardized procedure to assess the accuracy of IOS in vivo , and the results show that the proposed methodology can contribute to this purpose. The deviations measured in the study show a worsening accuracy when increasing the length of the scanning area.
Abstract
PURPOSE. The purpose of this study is to present a methodology to evaluate the accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOS) used in vivo . MATERIALS AND METHODS. A specific feature-based gauge was designed, manufactured, and measured in a coordinate measuring machine (CMM), obtaining reference distances and angles. Then, 10 scans were taken by an IOS with the gauge in the patient’s mouth and from the obtained stereolithography (STL) files, a total of 40 distances and 150 angles were measured and compared with the gauge’s reference values. In order to provide a comparison, there were defined distance and angle groups in accordance with the increasing scanning area: from a short span area to a complete-arch scanning extension. Data was analyzed using software for statistical analysis. RESULTS. Deviations in measured distances showed that accuracy worsened as the scanning area increased: trueness varied from 0.018 ± 0.021 mm in a distance equivalent to the space spanning a four-unit bridge to 0.106 ± 0.08 mm in a space equivalent to a complete arch. Precision ranged from 0.015 ± 0.03 mm to 0.077 ± 0.073 mm in the same two areas. When analyzing angles, deviations did not show such a worsening pattern. In addition, deviations in angle measurement values were low and there were no calculated significant differences among angle groups. CONCLUSION. Currently, there is no standardized procedure to assess the accuracy of IOS in vivo , and the results show that the proposed methodology can contribute to this purpose. The deviations measured in the study show a worsening accuracy when increasing the length of the scanning area.
참고문헌 (39)
- Ahrberg D, "Evaluation of fit and efficiency of CAD", CAM fabricated all-ceramic restorations based on direct and indirect digitalization:a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial, 2016, pp.20, 291~300
- Joda T, "Digital vs. conventional implant prosthetic workflows: a cost", time analysis, 2015, pp.26, 1430~1435
- Lee SJ, "Digital vs. conventional implant impressions: efficiency outcomes", Clin Oral Implants Res, 24, pp.111~115 (2013)
- Patzelt SB, "The time efficiency of intraoral scanners : an in vitro comparative study", J Am Dent Assoc, 145, pp.542~551 (2014)
- Marghalani A, "Digital versus conventional implant impressions for partially edentulous arches:An evaluation of accuracy", J Prosthet Dent, 119, pp.574~579 (2018)
- Renne W, "Evaluation of the accuracy of 7 digital scanners : An in vitro analysis based on 3-dimensional comparisons", J Prosthet Dent, 118, pp.36~42 (2017)
- Gjelvold B, "Intraoral digital impression technique compared to conventional impression technique. A randomized clinical trial", J Prosthodont, 25, pp.282~287 (2016)
- Iturrate M, "Accuracy of digital impressions for implant-supported complete-arch prosthesis, using an auxiliary geometry part-an in vitro study", Clin Oral Implants Res, 30, pp.1250~1258 (2019)
- Luo H, "A simple calibration procedure for structured light system", Opt Lasers Eng, 57, pp.6~12 (2014)
- Martínez-Pellitero S, "New procedure for qualification of structured light 3D scanners using an optical feature-based gauge", Opt Lasers Eng, 110, pp.193~206 (2018)
- Revilla-León M, "Intraoral digital scans-Part 1 : influence of ambient scanning light conditions on the accuracy(trueness and precision)of different intraoral scanners", J Prosthet Dent, 124, pp.372~378 (2020)
- Dury MR, "Surface finish and 3D optical scanner measurement performance for precision engineering", Proc - ASPE 2016 Annu Meet, pp.167~172 (2016)
- Yuming Chen, "Influence of Liquid on the Tooth Surface on the Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners: An In Vitro Study", Journal of Prosthodontics, 31(1), pp.59~64 (2021), Wiley[DOI]
- Imburgia M, "Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology : a comparative in vitro study", BMC Oral Health, 17, pp.92~ (2017)
- Aragón ML, "Validity and reliability of intraoral scanners compared to conventional gypsum models measurements:a systematic review", Eur J Orthod, 38, pp.429~434 (2016)
- Lim JH, "Comparison of digital intraoral scanner reproducibility and image trueness considering repetitive experience", J Prosthet Dent, 119, pp.225~232 (2018)
- Fukazawa S, "Investigation of accuracy and reproducibility of abutment position by intraoral scanners", J Prosthodont Res, 61, pp.450~459 (2017)
- Güth JF, "Accuracy of five intraoral scanners compared to indirect digitalization", Clin Oral Investig, 21, pp.1445~1455 (2017)
- Hack GD, "Evaluation of the accuracy of six intraoral scanning devices : an in-vitro investigation", Am Dent Assoc, 10, pp.1~5 (2015)
- Ali AO, "Accuracy of digital impressions achieved from five different digital impression systems", Dentistry, 5, pp.300~ (2015)
- Patzelt SB, "Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners", Clin Oral Investig, 18, pp.1687~1694 (2014)
- Patzelt SB, "Accuracy of computer-aided design", computer-aided manufacturing-generated dental casts based on intraoral scanner data, 2014, pp.145, 1133~1140
- Ender A, "Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions : a new method of measuring trueness and precision", J Prosthet Dent, 109, pp.121~128 (2013)
- Ender A, "In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining fullarch dental impressions", Quintessence Int, 46, pp.9~17 (2015)
- Mangano FG, "Trueness of 12 intraoral scanners in the full-arch implant impression : a comparative in vitro study", BMC Oral Health, 20, pp.263~ (2020)
- van der Meer WJ, "Application of intra-oral dental scanners in the digital workflow of implantology", PLoS One, 7, pp.e43312~ (2012)
- Güth JF, "A new method for the evaluation of the accuracy of full-arch digital impressions in vitro", Clin Oral Investig, 20, pp.1487~1494 (2016)
- Syrek A, "Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling", J Dent, 38, pp.553~559 (2010)
- Pradíes G, "Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions based on wavefront sampling technology", J Dent, 43, pp.201~208 (2015)
- Ender A, "In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods for obtaining quadrant dental impressions", Clin Oral Investig, 20, pp.1495~1504 (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)
- Ender A, "In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods of obtaining complete-arch dental impressions", J Prosthet Dent, 115, pp.313~320 (2016)
- Zhang F, "Validity of intraoral scans compared with plaster models : an in-vivo comparison of dental measurements and 3D surface analysis", PLoS One, 11, pp.e0157713~ (2016)
- Zimmermann M, "Precision of guided scanning procedures for fullarch digital impressions in vivo", J Orofac Orthop, 78, pp.466~471 (2017)
- Kuhr F, "A new method for assessing the accuracy of full arch impressions in patients", J Dent, 55, pp.68~74 (2016)
- Pan Y, "Evaluation of laboratory scanner accuracy by a novel calibration block for complete-arch implant rehabilitation", J Dent, 102, pp.103476~ (2020)
- "ISO 12836. Dentistry - Digitizing devices for CAD/CAM systems for indirect dental restorations - test methods for assessing accuracy" (2015)[URL]
- Mikel Iturrate, "A new method to measure the accuracy of intraoral scanners along the complete dental arch: A pilot study", The Journal of Advanced of Prosthodontics, 11(6), pp.331~340 (2019), 대한치과보철학회[DOI]
- "ISO 5725-1. Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results - Part 1: General principles and definitions" (1994)[URL]