Effect of reference objects on the accuracy of digital implant impressions in partially edentulous arches
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose. This study assesses the impact of additional reference objects (RO) on the trueness and precision of distance and angle measurements between scan bodies in digital scans with four different intraoral scanners (IOS) in partially edentulous models. Materials and methods. Maxilla models (Frasaco, Frasaco GmbH, Tettnang, Germany) with one (3-U) and two (4-U) missing posterior teeth were 3D printed and fitted with dental implants and scan bodies. Four intraoral scanners (Primescan (Dentsply Sirona, Charlotte, NC, USA) (PS), Trios 3 (3Shape) (T3), Trios 4 (3Shape) (T4), and CS3600 (Carestream Dentistry) (CS)) captured digital implant impressions with and without additional RO. Scans were aligned and assessed for distance and angulation measurements between scan bodies. Statistical analyses compared trueness and precision across model groups using the Student t-test and Welch’s ANOVA. Results. CS consistently showed the highest distance values across IOS devices in both the 4-U and 3-U models (P < .05), both with and without RO. The distance values were not considerably affected by the presence of RO (P > .05), except for a few isolated cases in the PS and CS groups of 3-U models. When measuring angles, CS usually showed greater values than the other IOS devices, especially when RO was present both in the 4-U and 3-U variants (P < .05). Conclusion. The influence of additional reference objects on accuracy varies with different scanner types, irrespective of edentulous area length.
Abstract
Purpose. This study assesses the impact of additional reference objects (RO) on the trueness and precision of distance and angle measurements between scan bodies in digital scans with four different intraoral scanners (IOS) in partially edentulous models. Materials and methods. Maxilla models (Frasaco, Frasaco GmbH, Tettnang, Germany) with one (3-U) and two (4-U) missing posterior teeth were 3D printed and fitted with dental implants and scan bodies. Four intraoral scanners (Primescan (Dentsply Sirona, Charlotte, NC, USA) (PS), Trios 3 (3Shape) (T3), Trios 4 (3Shape) (T4), and CS3600 (Carestream Dentistry) (CS)) captured digital implant impressions with and without additional RO. Scans were aligned and assessed for distance and angulation measurements between scan bodies. Statistical analyses compared trueness and precision across model groups using the Student t-test and Welch’s ANOVA. Results. CS consistently showed the highest distance values across IOS devices in both the 4-U and 3-U models (P < .05), both with and without RO. The distance values were not considerably affected by the presence of RO (P > .05), except for a few isolated cases in the PS and CS groups of 3-U models. When measuring angles, CS usually showed greater values than the other IOS devices, especially when RO was present both in the 4-U and 3-U variants (P < .05). Conclusion. The influence of additional reference objects on accuracy varies with different scanner types, irrespective of edentulous area length.
참고문헌 (33)
- Papaspyridakos P, "Digital vs conventional implant impressions : a systematic review and meta-analysis", J Prosthodont, 29, pp.660~678 (2020)
- Wulfman C, "Digital scanning for complete-arch implant-supported restorations : A systematic review", J Prosthet Dent, 124, pp.161~167 (2020)
- Rutkūnas V, "Accuracy of digital implant impressions with intraoral scanners. A systematic review", Eur J Oral Implantol, 10(Suppl 1), pp.101~120 (2017)
- Lin WS, "Effect of implant divergence on the accuracy of definitive casts created from traditional and digital implant-level impressions : an in vitro comparative study", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 30, pp.102~109 (2015)
- Gimenez-Gonzalez B, "An in vitro study of factors influencing the performance of digital intraoral impressions operating on active wavefront sampling technology with multiple implants in the edentulous maxilla", J Prosthodont, 26, pp.650~655 (2017)
- Stimmelmayr M, "Digital evaluation of the reproducibility of implant scanbody fit-an in vitro study", Clin Oral Investig, 16, pp.851~856 (2012)
- Ender A, "Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems", Int J Comput Dent, 16, pp.11~21 (2013)
- Mizumoto RM, "Accuracy of different digital scanning techniques and scan bodies for complete-arch implant-supported prostheses", J Prosthet Dent, 123, pp.96~104 (2020)
- 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)
- Roig E, "Fit of complete-arch implant-supported prostheses produced from an intraoral scan by using an auxiliary device and from an elastomeric impression : a pilot clinical trial", J Prosthet Dent, 128, pp.404~414 (2022)
- Rutkūnas V, "Effect of additional reference objects on accuracy of five intraoral scanners in partially and completely edentulous jaws : an in vitro study", J Prosthet Dent, 130, pp.111~118 (2023)
- Kim JE, "Accuracy of intraoral digital impressions using an artificial landmark", J Prosthet Dent, 117, pp.755~761 (2017)
- Nuytens P, "Reliability and time efficiency of digital vs. analog bite registration technique for the manufacture of full-arch fixed implant prostheses", J Clin Med, 11, pp.2882~ (2022)
- Lo Russo L, "Alignment of intraoral scans and registration of maxillo-mandibular relationships for the edentulous maxillary arch", J Prosthet Dent, 121, pp.737~740 (2019)
- Richert R, "Intraoral scanner technologies : a review to make a successful impression", J Healthc Eng, 2017, pp.8427595~ (2017)
- Michelinakis G, "The direct digital workflow in fixed implant prosthodontics : a narrative review", BMC Oral Health, 21, pp.37~ (2021)
- 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)
- Fukazawa S, "Investigation of accuracy and reproducibility of abutment position by intraoral scanners", J Prosthodont Res, 61, pp.450~459 (2017)
- Malik J, "Comparison of accuracy between a conventional and two digital intraoral impression techniques", Int J Prosthodont, 31, pp.107~113 (2018)
- Chochlidakis K, "Digital versus conventional full-arch implant impressions : a prospective study on 16 edentulous maxillae", J Prosthodont, 29, pp.281~286 (2020)
- Ender A, "Accuracy of complete-and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro", Int J Comput Dent, 22, pp.11~19 (2019)
- Passos L, "Impact of different scanning strategies on the accuracy of two current intraoral scanning systems in complete-arch impressions : an in vitro study", Int J Comput Dent, 22, pp.307~319 (2019)
- Son K, "Feasibility of using an intraoral scanner for a complete arch digital scan, part 2 : a comparison of scan strategies", J Prosthet Dent, 129, pp.341~349 (2023)
- Diker B, "Accuracy of six intraoral scanners for scanning complete-arch and 4-unit fixed partial dentures : an in vitro study", J Prosthet Dent, 128, pp.187~194 (2022)
- 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 fullarch digital impressions in vivo", J Orofac Orthop, 78, pp.466~471 (2017)
- Imburgia M, "Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology : a comparative in vitro study", BMC Oral Health, 17, pp.92~ (2017)
- Flügge TV, "Precision of dental implant digitization using intraoral scanners", Int J Prosthodont, 29, pp.277~283 (2016)
- Kim JE, "Accuracy of scanned stock abutments using different intraoral scanners : an in vitro study", J Prosthodont, 28, pp.797~803 (2019)
- Iturrate M, "Accuracy analysis of complete-arch digital scans in edentulous arches when using an auxiliary geometric device", J Prosthet Dent, 121, pp.447~454 (2019)
- Huang R, "Improved scanning accuracy with newly designed scan bodies : an in vitro study comparing digital versus conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation", Clin Oral Implants Res, 31, pp.625~633 (2020)
- Motel C, "Impact of different scan bodies and scan strategies on the accuracy of digital implant impressions assessed with an intraoral scanner : an in vitro study", J Prosthodont, 29, pp.309~314 (2020)
- Alikhasi M, "Three-dimensional accuracy of digital impression versus conventional method : effect of implant angulation and connection type", Int J Dent, 2018, pp.3761750~ (2018)