Precision of digital implant models compared to conventional implant models for posterior single implant crowns: A within-subject comparison

被引:32
|
作者
Muhlemann, Sven [1 ]
Greter, Elena A. [1 ]
Park, Ji-Man [2 ]
Hammerle, Christoph H. F. [1 ]
Thoma, Daniel S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Zurich, Clin Fixed & Removable Prosthodont & Dent Mat Sc, Ctr Dent Med, Zurich, Switzerland
[2] Yonsei Univ, Coll Dent, Dept Prosthodont, Seoul, South Korea
关键词
UNDERSTANDING DENTAL CAD/CAM; ENGINEERING VIEWPOINT. PART; MILLING MACHINES; IMPRESSIONS; ACCURACY; RESTORATIONS; WORKFLOW; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1111/clr.13349
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
ObjectiveTo calculate the precision of the implant analog position in digital models generated from different computer-assisted design and computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD-CAM) systems compared to gypsum models acquired from conventional implant impressions. Materials and methodsIn five patients in need of a single implant crown, a within-subject comparison was performed applying four different manufacturing processes for the implant model. Each implant was scanned with three different intraoral scanners: iTero Cadent (ITE), Lava True Definition (LTD), and Trios 3Shape (TRI). All digital implant models were fabricated using the corresponding certified CAD-CAM workflow. In addition, a conventional impression was taken (CON) and a gypsum model fabricated. Three consecutive impressions were acquired with each impression system. Following fabrication, all implant models were scanned. The datasets were aligned by a repeated best-fit algorithm and the precision for the implant analog and the adjacent teeth was measured. The precision served as a measure for reproducibility. ResultsMean precision values of the implant analog in the digital models were 57.232.6 mu m (ITE), 88.6 +/- 46.0 mu m (TRI), and 176.7 +/- 120.4 mu m (LTD). Group CON (32.7 +/- 11.6 mu m) demonstrated a statistically significantly lower mean precision value for the implant position in the implant model as compared to all other groups representing a high reproducibility. The mean precision values for the reference ranged between 31.4 +/- 3.5 mu m (TRI) and 39.5 +/- 16.5 mu m (ITE). No statistical significant difference was calculated between the four treatment groups. ConclusionsThe conventional implant model represented the greatest reproducibility of the implant position. Digital implant models demonstrated less precision compared to the conventional workflow.
引用
收藏
页码:931 / 936
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of Treatment Time for Single-Implant Crowns Between Digital and Conventional Workflows for Posterior Implant Restorations: A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Jarangkul, Worapat
    Kunavisarut, Chatchai
    Pornprasertsuk-Damrongsri, Suchaya
    Joda, Tim
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2024, 39 (02) : 286 - 293
  • [2] Immediate digital implant scanning workflow for posterior single implant-supported crowns: A case series
    Carranza, Maria Gabriela
    Geminiani, Alessandro
    Chochlidakis, Konstantinos
    Genetti, Loren
    Tsigarida, Alexandra
    Ercoli, Carlo
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2020, 124 (05): : 503 - 508
  • [3] A double-blind randomized within-subject study to evaluate clinical applicability of four digital workflows for the fabrication of posterior single implant crown
    Guo, Danni
    Muehlemann, Sven
    Pan, Shaoxia
    Zhou, Yongsheng
    Jung, Ronald E.
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2023, 34 (12) : 1319 - 1329
  • [4] Clinical Fitting and Adjustment Time for Implant-Supported Crowns Comparing Digital and Conventional Workflows
    Joda, Tim
    Katsoulis, Joannis
    Bragger, Urs
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2016, 18 (05) : 946 - 954
  • [5] Digital versus conventional prosthetic workflow for dental students providing implant-supported single crowns: A randomized crossover study
    Seth, Chahak
    Bawa, Annika
    Gotfredsen, Klaus
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2024, 131 (03): : 450 - 456
  • [6] Comparison of 3D positional accuracy of implant analogs in printed resin models versus conventional stone casts: Effect of implant angulation
    Tan, Shaun
    Tan, Ming Yi
    Wong, Keng Mun
    Maria, Rahmat
    Tan, Keson Beng Choon
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2024, 33 (01): : 46 - 53
  • [7] Time-Efficiency Analysis Comparing Digital and Conventional Workflows for Implant Crowns: A Prospective Clinical Crossover Trial
    Joda, Tim
    Braegger, Urs
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2015, 30 (05) : 1047 - 1053
  • [8] Comparison between Conventional and Digital Workflow in Implant Prosthetic Rehabilitation: A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Corsalini, Massimo
    Barile, Giuseppe
    Ranieri, Francesco
    Morea, Edvige
    Corsalini, Tommaso
    Capodiferro, Saverio
    Palumbo, Rosario Roberto
    JOURNAL OF FUNCTIONAL BIOMATERIALS, 2024, 15 (06)
  • [9] Evaluation of adjacent tooth displacement in the posterior implant restoration with proximal contact loss by superimposition of digital models
    Jo, Deuk-Won
    Kwon, Min-Jung
    Kim, Jong-Hee
    Kim, Young-Kyun
    Yi, Yang-Jin
    JOURNAL OF ADVANCED PROSTHODONTICS, 2019, 11 (02): : 88 - 94
  • [10] Intrasubject comparison of digital vs. conventional workflow for screw-retained single-implant crowns: Prosthodontic and patient-centered outcomes
    Delize, Vincent
    Bouhy, Alice
    Lambert, France
    Lamy, Marc
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2019, 30 (09) : 892 - 902