Understanding the effect of scan spans on the accuracy of intraoral and desktop scanners

被引:43
作者
Chen, Yuming [1 ]
Zhai, Zhihao [1 ]
Watanabe, Shota [1 ]
Nakano, Tamaki [1 ]
Ishigaki, Shoichi [1 ]
机构
[1] Osaka Univ, Grad Sch Dent, Dept Fixed Prosthodont, 1-8 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 5650871, Japan
关键词
Intraoral scanners; Desktop scanners; Trueness; Precision; Digital dentistry; AMBIENT LIGHT; IMPRESSIONS; TIME;
D O I
10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104220
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives: This study aimed to measure and compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of intraoral scanners and desktop scanners when scanning different spans. Methods: Three plaster models representing different spans (full arch, half arch, and three teeth) were obtained from conventional silicone impressions of a maxillary typodont and used as the scanning objects. An industrial scanner (ATOS III Triple Scan) was used to scan the three plaster models to obtain reference digital models. The plaster models were then scanned using two intraoral scanners (Trios 3 and Primescan) and two desktop scanners (LS3 and D2000) to obtain test digital models. The reference and test models were imported into professional reverse engineering software for processing and analysis. The root mean square value indicated differences between the reference and test models. Two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni multiple comparison tests were used for statistical analysis. Results: Two-way ANOVA tests revealed significant differences in trueness and precision for different scan spans (p < 0.001) and different scanners (p < 0.001), which indicates that the scanner types and scan spans affect the accuracy of the scanner. There was no significant difference in the accuracy of the D2000 at three different scan spans (trueness: 23.82 +/- 0.22 mu m, 21.53 +/- 0.18 mu m, and 21.02 +/- 0.27 mu m respectively; precision: 7.86 +/- 0.83 mu m, 7.87 +/- 1.11 mu m, and 7.82 +/- 0.84 mu m respectively). For the LS3 and the two intraoral scanners, the accuracy of the full arch scan (LS 3, trueness: 33.35 +/- 0.47 mu m, precision:15.36 +/- 3.10 mu m; Trios 3, trueness: 46.92 +/- 9.23 mu m, precision:20.79 +/- 3.08 mu m; Primescan, trueness: 28.73 +/- 0.77 mu m, precision:15.74 +/- 2.45 mu m) was significantly lower than that of the half arch (LS 3, trueness: 27.27 +/- 0.43 mu m, precision:5.62 +/- 0.88 mu m; trios 3, Trueness: 22.29 +/- 1.50 mu m, precision:14.12 +/- 2.25 mu m; Primescan, trueness: 18.91 +/- 0.70 mu m, precision:7.94 +/- 1.09 mu m) and three teeth scans (LS 3, trueness: 24.68 +/- 0.36 mu m, precision:5.29 +/- 0.62 mu m; Trios 3, trueness: 16.92 +/- 0.78 mu m, precision:11.95 +/- 2.22 mu m; Primescan, trueness: 15.79 +/- 0.65 mu m, precision:7.68 +/- 0.62 mu m). Conclusions: The scan span affected the accuracy of the intraoral scanners, but not necessarily the accuracy of the desktop scanners.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]   Evaluating the influence of ambient light on scanning trueness, precision, and time of intra oral scanner [J].
Arakida, Toshio ;
Kanazawa, Manabu ;
Iwaki, Maiko ;
Suzuki, Tetsuya ;
Minakuchi, Shunsuke .
JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTIC RESEARCH, 2018, 62 (03) :324-329
[2]   In vitro evaluation of the accuracy and precision of intraoral and extraoral scans [J].
Baghani, Mohammad Taghi ;
Shayegh, Sayed Shojaedin ;
Johnston, William M. ;
Shidfar, Shireen ;
Hakimaneh, Seyed Mohammad Reza .
JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2021, 126 (05) :665-670
[3]   Accuracy and Precision Evaluation of International Standard Spherical Model by Digital Dental Scanners [J].
Cai, Hong Xin ;
Jia, Qi ;
Shi, HaoYu ;
Jiang, Yujie ;
Xue, Jingnan ;
Chen, ChunXu ;
Gong, Haotian ;
Liu, Jie ;
Lee, Eui-Seok ;
Jiang, Heng Bo .
SCANNING, 2020, 2020
[4]   Comparison of measured deviations in digital implant scans depending on software and operator [J].
Cakmak, Gulce ;
Marques, Vinicius Rizzo ;
Donmez, Mustafa Borga ;
Lu, Wei-En ;
Abou-Ayash, Samir ;
Yilmaz, Burak .
JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2022, 122
[5]   Influence of Liquid on the Tooth Surface on the Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners: An In Vitro Study [J].
Chen, Yuming ;
Zhai, Zhihao ;
Li, Hefei ;
Yamada, Shuhei ;
Matsuoka, Takashi ;
Ono, Shinji ;
Nakano, Tamaki .
JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2022, 31 (01) :59-64
[6]   Will digital impressions eliminate the current problems with conventional impressions? [J].
Christensen, Gordon J. .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION, 2008, 139 (06) :761-763
[7]   Accuracy of six intraoral scanners for scanning complete-arch and 4-unit fixed partial dentures: An in vitro study [J].
Diker, Burcu ;
Tak, Onjen .
JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2022, 128 (02) :187-194
[8]   Trueness and precision of combined healing abutment-scan body system depending on the scan pattern and implant location: An in-vitro study [J].
Donmez, Mustafa Borga ;
Cakmak, Gulce ;
Atalay, Sevda ;
Yilmaz, Hakan ;
Yilmaz, Burak .
JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2022, 124
[9]   The effect different substrates have on the trueness and precision of eight different intraoral scanners [J].
Dutton, Ethan ;
Ludlow, Mark ;
Mennito, Anthony ;
Kelly, Abigail ;
Evans, Zachary ;
Culp, Alexander ;
Kessler, Raymond ;
Renne, Walter .
JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC AND RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2020, 32 (02) :204-218
[10]   In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions [J].
Ender, Andreas ;
Mehl, Albert .
QUINTESSENCE INTERNATIONAL, 2015, 46 (01) :9-17