Effect of saliva isolation and intraoral light levels on performance of intraoral scanners

被引:35
作者
Camc, Hasan [1 ]
Salmanpour, Farhad [1 ]
机构
[1] Afyonkarahisar Saglik Bilimleri Univ, Dept Orthodont, Guvenevler Mh Inonu Bulvari 4, TR-03030 Afyon, Turkey
关键词
CONVENTIONAL IMPRESSIONS; IMPLANT IMPRESSIONS; ACCURACY; RELIABILITY; TIME; REPRODUCIBILITY; EFFICIENCY; VALIDITY; SYSTEM;
D O I
10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.03.022
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Introduction: The use of digital models in orthodontics is becoming increasingly widespread. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and performance of digital intraoral scanning under 4 different intraoral environmental conditions. Methods: Four digital models were acquired with TRIOS intraoral scanner (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) for 50 subjects. A total of 200 digital models were divided into 4 groups as follows: daylight and saliva (group 1), daylight with saliva isolation (group 2), reflector light and saliva (group 3), and relatively dark oral environment and saliva (group 4). The 4 digital models were superimposed, and the edges of the models were trimmed to create common boundaries (Geomagic Control X; 3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC). Group 2 models were used as a reference and superimposed separately with the models of the other 3 groups. Deviations between corresponding models were compared as means of negative deviation, means of positive deviation, in total area, out total area, positively positioned areas, and negatively positioned areas. In addition, all groups were compared in terms of scanning time, the total number of images, and the mesiodistal width of teeth. Results: Overlapping of group 1 with the reference model (group 2), a surface deviation of 13.1% (out total area) was observed. This analysis revealed that a 13% deviation was caused by the presence of saliva alone. This rate was 12.6% in group 3 and 15.5% in group 4, respectively. The values for means of negative deviation were -55 mu in group 1,-63 mu in group 3, and -68 mu in group 4. Means of positive deviation values were distributed among groups as follows: 68 mu in group 1, 69 mu in group 3, and 78 mu in group 4. The total number of images was observed, at least in group 4. Conclusions: The intraoral scanner performance was affected by different environmental conditions, and that caused variations on the surface of digital models. However, the performance of the intraoral scanner was independent of the scanning time and mesiodistal width of the teeth.
引用
收藏
页码:759 / 766
页数:8
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Review [J].
Ahlholm, Pekka ;
Sipila, Kirsi ;
Vallittu, Pekka ;
Jakonen, Minna ;
Kotiranta, Ulla .
JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2018, 27 (01) :35-41
[2]   Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study [J].
Amin, Sarah ;
Weber, Hans Peter ;
Finkelman, Matthew ;
El Rafie, Khaled ;
Kudara, Yukio ;
Papaspyridakos, Panos .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2017, 28 (11) :1360-1367
[3]   Validity and reliability of intraoral scanners compared to conventional gypsum models measurements: a systematic review [J].
Aragon, Monica L. C. ;
Pontes, Luana F. ;
Bichara, Livia M. ;
Flores-Mir, Carlos ;
Normando, David .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 2016, 38 (04) :429-434
[4]   Infrared system for 3D scanning of metallic surfaces [J].
Aubreton, O. ;
Bajard, A. ;
Verney, B. ;
Truchetet, F. .
MACHINE VISION AND APPLICATIONS, 2013, 24 (07) :1513-1524
[5]   Treatment comfort, time perception, and preference for conventional and digital impression techniques: A comparative study in young patients [J].
Burhardt, Lukasz ;
Livas, Christos ;
Kerdijk, Wouter ;
van der Meer, Wicher Joerd ;
Ren, Yijin .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2016, 150 (02) :261-267
[6]   Comparison of digital intraoral scanners and alginate impressions: Time and patient satisfaction [J].
Burzynski, Jennifer A. ;
Firestone, Allen R. ;
Beck, F. Michael ;
Fields, Henry W., Jr. ;
Deguchi, Toru .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2018, 153 (04) :534-541
[7]  
Callahan C, 2005, SEMINARS ORTHODONTIC, V11, P94
[8]  
Chandran DT, 2010, BIO-MED MATER ENG, V20, P243, DOI 10.3233/BME-2010-0638
[9]   Accuracy of a Digital Impression System Based on Parallel Confocal Laser Technology for Implants with Consideration of Operator Experience and Implant Angulation and Depth [J].
Gimenez, Beatriz ;
Oezcan, Mutlu ;
Martinez-Rus, Francisco ;
Pradies, Guillermo .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2014, 29 (04) :853-862
[10]   Accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of intraoral scanners for full-arch impressions: a systematic review of the clinical evidence [J].
Goracci, Cecilia ;
Franchi, Lorenzo ;
Vichi, Alessandro ;
Ferrari, Marco .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 2016, 38 (04) :422-428