Comparison of the accuracy between conventional and various digital implant impressions for an implant-supported mandibular complete arch-fixed prosthesis: An in vitro study

被引:11
作者
Kosago, Pitchaporn [1 ]
Ungurawasaporn, Chatcharwin [1 ]
Kukiattrakoon, Boonlert [1 ]
机构
[1] Prince Songkla Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Conservat Dent, Hat Yai, Thailand
来源
JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY | 2023年 / 32卷 / 07期
关键词
accuracy; digital impression; intraoral scanners; stereophotogrammetry; INTRAORAL SCANNERS; 3-DIMENSIONAL ACCURACY; MISFIT;
D O I
10.1111/jopr.13604
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Purpose This in vitro study compared the accuracy between conventional and different intraoral scanner impression methods and stereophotogrammetry term of 3D deviation for a complete mandibular edentulous arch with 5 placed implants. Materials and methods An edentulous mandibular model was prepared with three straight and two 17 degrees angled screw-retained abutments screwed on implants. Different impression techniques were compared: one conventional impression, CO (open-tray splint impression coping, Polyether), three groups of intraoral scanners, TS (Trios 4), IT (iTero Element 2), and PS (Primescan), and one stereophotogrammetry, PIC (Precise Implants Capture). An extraoral scanner (E4 scanner) was used to digitize the reference model as a control group. Scan body positions were compared with 3D deviation by using a 3D analysis software program (Geomagic ControlX 2020.1.1) with the best-fit alignment technique. The accuracy of the scan bodies' position of each impression technique between each group area was analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Scheffe's comparison test for trueness and precision. (alpha = 0.05). Results Statistical 3D deviations of the whole scan body were found among the CO, TS, PS, IT, and PIC groups for both trueness (p < 0.05) and precision (p < 0.05). PIC showed the least 3D deviation of trueness (48.74 +/- 1.80 mu m) and precision (5.46 +/- 1.10 mu m), followed by TS, PS, IT, and CO. CO had the highest 3D deviation of trueness (141 +/- 5.58 mu m) and precision (40.4 +/- 1.3.39 mu m), which was significantly different from PIC, TS, and PS. Conclusions For completed-arch digital implant impressions, stereophotogrammetry has shown better accuracy than other digital and conventional impression techniques, especially in terms of precision. The highest 3D deviation was found in the conventional splint open-tray impression technique.
引用
收藏
页码:616 / 624
页数:9
相关论文
共 34 条
  • [1] The Influence of Digital Fabrication Options on the Accuracy of Dental Implant-Based Single Units and Complete-Arch Frameworks
    Abdel-Azim, Tamer
    Zandinejad, Amirali
    Elathamna, Eiad
    Lin, Weishao
    Morton, Dean
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2014, 29 (06) : 1281 - 1288
  • [2] Stereophotogrammetry for Recording the Position of Multiple Implants: Technical Description
    Agustin-Panadero, Ruben
    Penarrocha-Oltra, David
    Gomar-Vercher, Sonia
    Penarrocha-Diago, Miguel
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS, 2015, 28 (06) : 631 - 636
  • [3] Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Conventional Versus Digital Complete Arch Implant Impressions
    Albayrak, Berkman
    Sukotjo, Cortino
    Wee, Alvin G.
    Korkmaz, Ismail Hakki
    Bayindir, Funda
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2021, 30 (02): : 163 - 170
  • [4] Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Digital Impression versus Conventional Method: Effect of Implant Angulation and Connection Type
    Alikhasi, Marzieh
    Siadat, Hakime
    Nasirpour, Alireza
    Hasanzade, Mahya
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2018, 2018
  • [5] Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study
    Amin, Sarah
    Weber, Hans Peter
    Finkelman, Matthew
    El Rafie, Khaled
    Kudara, Yukio
    Papaspyridakos, Panos
    [J]. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2017, 28 (11) : 1360 - 1367
  • [6] Confocal 3D Optical Intraoral Scanners and Comparison of Image Capturing Accuracy
    Amornvit, Pokpong
    Rokaya, Dinesh
    Peampring, Chaimongkon
    Sanohkan, Sasiwimol
    [J]. CMC-COMPUTERS MATERIALS & CONTINUA, 2021, 66 (01): : 303 - 314
  • [7] In Vitro Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Digital Implant Impressions: The Effect of Implant Angulation
    Chia, Vanessa A.
    Esguerra, Roxanna J.
    Teoh, Khim Hean
    Teo, Juin Wei
    Wong, Keng Mun
    Tan, Keson B.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2017, 32 (02) : 313 - 321
  • [8] Full arch digital scanning systems performances for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: a comparative study of 8 intraoral scanners
    Di Fiore, Adolfo
    Meneghello, Roberto
    Graiff, Lorenzo
    Savio, Gianpaolo
    Vigolo, Paolo
    Monaco, Carlo
    Stellini, Edoardo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTIC RESEARCH, 2019, 63 (04) : 396 - 403
  • [9] Ender A, 2019, INT J COMPUT DENT, V22, P11
  • [10] G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences
    Faul, Franz
    Erdfelder, Edgar
    Lang, Albert-Georg
    Buchner, Axel
    [J]. BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2007, 39 (02) : 175 - 191