Comparing the accuracy of six intraoral scanners on prepared teeth and effect of scanning sequence
2
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of six recently introduced intraoral scanners (IOSs) for single crown preparations isolated from the complete arch, and to determine the effect of scanning sequence on accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A complete arch with right and left canine preparations for single crowns was used as a study model. The reference dataset was obtained by scanning the complete arch using a highly accurate industrial scanner (ATOS Core 80, GOM GmbH). Six different IOSs (Trios, iTero, Planmeca Emerald, Cerec Omnicam, Primescan, and Virtuo Vivo) were used to scan the model ten times each. The scans performed with each IOS were divided into two groups, based on whether the scanning sequence started from the right or left quadrant (n=5). The accuracy of digital impression was evaluated using three-dimensional analyzing software (Geomagic Studio 12, 3D Systems). The Kruskal Wallis and Mann- Whitney U statistical tests for trueness analysis and the One-way ANOVA test for precision analysis were performed (α=.05). RESULTS. The trueness and precision values were the lowest with the Primescan (25 and 10 µm), followed by Trios (40.5 and 11 µm), Omnicam (41.5 µm and 18 µm), Virtuo Vivo (52 and 37 µm), iTero (70 and 12 µm) and Emerald (73.5 and 60 µm). Regarding trueness, iTero showed more deviation when scanning started from the right (P=.009). CONCLUSION. The accuracy of digital impressions varied depending on the IOS and scanning sequence used. Primescan had the highest accuracy, while Emerald showed the most deviation in accuracy for single crown preparations.
Abstract
PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of six recently introduced intraoral scanners (IOSs) for single crown preparations isolated from the complete arch, and to determine the effect of scanning sequence on accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A complete arch with right and left canine preparations for single crowns was used as a study model. The reference dataset was obtained by scanning the complete arch using a highly accurate industrial scanner (ATOS Core 80, GOM GmbH). Six different IOSs (Trios, iTero, Planmeca Emerald, Cerec Omnicam, Primescan, and Virtuo Vivo) were used to scan the model ten times each. The scans performed with each IOS were divided into two groups, based on whether the scanning sequence started from the right or left quadrant (n=5). The accuracy of digital impression was evaluated using three-dimensional analyzing software (Geomagic Studio 12, 3D Systems). The Kruskal Wallis and Mann- Whitney U statistical tests for trueness analysis and the One-way ANOVA test for precision analysis were performed (α=.05). RESULTS. The trueness and precision values were the lowest with the Primescan (25 and 10 µm), followed by Trios (40.5 and 11 µm), Omnicam (41.5 µm and 18 µm), Virtuo Vivo (52 and 37 µm), iTero (70 and 12 µm) and Emerald (73.5 and 60 µm). Regarding trueness, iTero showed more deviation when scanning started from the right (P=.009). CONCLUSION. The accuracy of digital impressions varied depending on the IOS and scanning sequence used. Primescan had the highest accuracy, while Emerald showed the most deviation in accuracy for single crown preparations.
참고문헌 (32)
- Memari Y, "Marginal adaptation of CAD", CAM all-ceramic crowns made by different impression methods : A literature review, 2019, pp.28, e536~e544
- Ueda K, "Fit of 4-unit FDPs from CoCr and zirconia after conventional and digital impressions", Clin Oral Investig, 20, pp.283~289 (2016)
- Chochlidakis KM, "Digital versus conventional impressions for fixed prosthodontics: A systematic review and meta-analysis", J Prosthet Dent, 116, pp.184~190 (2016)
- Ahlholm P, "Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics:A review", J Prosthodont, 27, pp.35~41 (2018)
- Hayama H, "Trueness and precision of digital impressions obtained using an intraoral scanner with different head size in the partially edentulous mandible", J Prosthodont Res, 62, pp.347~352 (2018)
- Yuzbasioglu E, "Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients’ perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes", BMC Oral Health, 14, pp.10~ (2014)
- "ISO 5725-1. Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results - Part 1: General principles and definitions" (1994)[URL]
- Nedelcu RG, "Scanning accuracy and precision in 4 intraoral scanners : an in vitro comparison based on 3-dimensional analysis", J Prosthet Dent, 112, pp.1461~1471 (2014)
- Sim JY, "Comparing the accuracy (trueness and precision) of models of fixed dental prostheses fabricated by digital and conventional workflows", J Prosthodont Res, 63, pp.25~30 (2019)
- Ender A, "In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions", Quintessence Int, 46, pp.9~17 (2015)
- Carbajal Mejía JB, "Influence of abutment tooth geometry on the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining dental impressions", J Prosthet Dent, 118, pp.392~399 (2017)
- Ender A, "Accuracy of completeand partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro", Int J Comput Dent, 22, pp.11~19 (2019)
- Latham J, "Effect of scan pattern on complete-arch scans with 4 digital scanners", J Prosthet Dent, 123, pp.85~95 (2020)
- Ender A, "In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods for obtaining quadrant dental impressions", Clin Oral Investig, 20, pp.1495~1504 (2016)
- Zimmermann M, "Precision of guided scanning procedures for full-arch digital impressions in vivo", J Orofac Orthop, 78, pp.466~471 (2017)
- Medina-Sotomayor P, "Accuracy of 4 digital scanning systems on prepared teeth digitally isolated from a complete dental arch", J Prosthet Dent, 121, pp.811~820 (2019)
- Rauch A, "Chair-side generated posterior monolithic lithium disilicate crowns : clinical survival after 6years", Clin Oral Investig, 21, pp.2083~2089 (2017)
- Boeddinghaus M, "Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients", Clin Oral Investig, 19, pp.2027~2034 (2015)
- Hack GD, "Evaluation of the accuracy of six intraoral scanning devices : an in-vitro investigation", Am Dent Assoc, 10, pp.1~5 (2015)
- Mühlemann S, "Precision of digital implant models compared to conventional implant models for posterior single implant crowns: A within-subject comparison", Clin Oral Implants Res, 29, pp.931~936 (2018)
- Kim RJ, "Accuracy of 9 intraoral scanners for complete-arch image acquisition : A qualitative and quantitative evaluation", J Prosthet Dent, 120, pp.895~903 (2018)
- Haddadi Y, "Effect of software version on the accuracy of an intraoral scanning device", Int J Prosthodont, 31, pp.375~376 (2018)
- Di Fiore A, "Full arch digital scanning systems performances for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses : a comparative study of 8 intraoral scanners", J Prosthodont Res, 63, pp.396~403 (2019)
- Osnes CA, "Full arch precision of six intraoral scanners in vitro", J Prosthodont Res, 64, pp.6~11 (2020)
- Ji-won Anh, "A comparison of the precision of three-dimensional images acquired by 2 digital intraoral scanners: effects of tooth irregularity and scanning direction", 대한치과교정학회지, 46(1), pp.3~12 (2016), 대한치과교정학회
- "GOM: ATOS Core - Features"[URL]
- Kim JE, "Accuracy of intraoral digital impressions using an artificial landmark", J Prosthet Dent, 117, pp.755~761 (2017)
- Treesh JC, "Complete-arch accuracy of intraoral scanners", J Prosthet Dent, 120, pp.382~388 (2018)
- Mandelli F, "Evaluation of the accuracy of extraoral laboratory scanners with a singletooth abutment model : A 3D analysis", J Prosthodont Res, 61, pp.363~370 (2017)
- Richert R, "Intraoral scanner technologies : A review to make a successful impression", J Healthc Eng, 2017, pp.8427595~ (2017)
- 박지만, "Comparative analysis on reproducibility among 5 intraoral scanners: sectional analysis according to restoration type and preparation outline form", The Journal of Advanced of Prosthodontics, 8(5), pp.354~362 (2016), 대한치과보철학회[DOI]
- Kim RJ, "Trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position", PLoS One, 14, pp.e0222070~ (2019)