Comparison of the Accuracy and Precision of Digital Scans for Implant-Supported Maxillary Hybrid Prosthesis: An in vitro Study

被引:0
作者
Sultanoglu, E. Guzelce [1 ]
Keles, B. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hlth Sci, Hamidiye Fac Dent, Dept Prosthodont, Istanbul, Turkiye
关键词
Accuracy; digital impression; intraoral scanner; precision; trueness; INTRAORAL SCANNERS; IMPRESSION TECHNIQUE; TRUENESS; IMPACT;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background:Numerous intraoral scanners (IOS) devices are currently used for intraoral impressions in prosthodontics. It is crucial to assess the accuracy and precision of these devices for clinical use.Aim:This in vitro study aimed to assess and compare the accuracy and precision of six IOS in the all-on-4 treatment concept. Trueness evaluation involved aligning the data from six dental scanners with the reference model. Precision analysis encompassed aligning the data from all six scanners within their respective groups.Methods:An edentulous maxillary model was utilized, with four implants placed at 12, 15, 22, and 25 teeth positions, simulating the all-on-4 approach using resin acrylic. Following the placement of scanbodies, each of the six IOSs (Primescan, Trios 3, Trios 4, Trios 5, Virtuo Vivo, and Medit i 700) performed eight scans of the model. An industrial scanner was employed for the control group. Data alignment and comparison were executed using the CloudCompare software (v2.11.3, General Public License of Telecom ParisTech, Paris, France). Statistical scrutiny encompassed the Shapiro-Wilk, Levene's, and Games-Howell tests.Results:Among the scanners, Primescan exhibited the highest trueness (35.75 +/- 26.08 mu m), whereas the Medit i700 demonstrated superior precision (0.163 mu m).Conclusion:IOS can be used to make dental impressions within the all-on-4 concept. More comprehensive and clinical studies are needed on this subject.
引用
收藏
页码:1245 / 1251
页数:7
相关论文
共 39 条
  • [31] Learning curve of digital intraoral scanning - an in vivo study
    Roth, Ivett
    Czigola, Alexandra
    Joos-Kovacs, Gellert Levente
    Dalos, Magdolna
    Hermann, Peter
    Borbely, Judit
    [J]. BMC ORAL HEALTH, 2020, 20 (01)
  • [32] Rutkunas V, 2017, EUR J ORAL IMPLANTOL, V10, P101
  • [33] The impact of software updates on accuracy of intraoral scanners
    Schmalzl, Judit
    Roth, Ivett
    Borbely, Judit
    Hermann, Peter
    Vecsei, Balint
    [J]. BMC ORAL HEALTH, 2023, 23 (01)
  • [34] Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow
    Seelbach, Paul
    Brueckel, Cora
    Woestmann, Bernd
    [J]. CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2013, 17 (07) : 1759 - 1764
  • [35] Comparing the accuracy (trueness and precision) of models of fixed dental prostheses fabricated by digital and conventional workflows
    Sim, Ji-Young
    Jang, Yeon
    Kim, Woong-Chul
    Kim, Hae-Young
    Lee, Dong-Hwan
    Kim, Ji-Hwan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTIC RESEARCH, 2019, 63 (01) : 25 - 30
  • [36] Skramstad MJ, 2019, INT J COMPUT DENT, V22, P69
  • [37] Intraoral Digital Impression Technique: A Review
    Su Ting-shu
    Sun Jian
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2015, 24 (04): : 313 - 321
  • [38] The effect of software updates on the trueness and precision of intraoral scanners
    Vag, Janos
    Renne, Walter
    Revell, Griffin
    Ludlow, Mark
    Mennito, Anthony
    Teich, Sorin T.
    Gutmacher, Zvi
    [J]. QUINTESSENCE INTERNATIONAL, 2021, 52 (07): : 636 - 644
  • [39] Wheeler RC., 1969, An Atlas of Tooth form