Evaluation of the Accuracy of Different Intraoral Scanners in Endocrown Restorations.

Mojdeh Meisami-Azad, Mohammad Alihemmati, Sayed Shojaedin Shayegh, Mohammad Amin Bafandeh
{"title":"Evaluation of the Accuracy of Different Intraoral Scanners in Endocrown Restorations.","authors":"Mojdeh Meisami-Azad, Mohammad Alihemmati, Sayed Shojaedin Shayegh, Mohammad Amin Bafandeh","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the trueness and precision of various intraoral scanners (IOSs) in relation to endocrown restorations.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>One mandibular molar was mounted within an acrylic resin block. The tooth was prepared for an endocrown restoration, involving a 2-mm cusp reduction, a 3.5-mm pulp chamber depth, and a butt-joint margin. The sample was scanned by three different IOSs (3Shape TRIOS 4, Carestream 3800, and Medit i700), with 10 scans taken by each and then converted into STL files. A high-precision scanner captured a reference scan, which was also converted into an STL file. Trueness was assessed by superimposing each sample scan onto the reference, while precision was determined by superimposing the STL files within each group. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey HSD post hoc test and Mann-Whitney U test (α = .05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study found that TRIOS 4 exhibited the highest trueness (22.44 ± 15.01 μm), followed by Medit i700 (24.59 ± 12.80 μm) and CS 3800 (29.05 ± 7.75 μm). In terms of precision, CS 3800 had the best results (21.55 ± 8.87 μm), followed by Medit i700 (43.80 ± 17.42 μm) and TRIOS 4 (47.28 ± 13.93 μm). Only the differences between the precision of the CS 3800 and the other two scanners were statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study found that all three scanners had similar trueness, but CS 3800 had significantly better precision than the other two scanners. However, all of the scanners demonstrated acceptable levels of accuracy in the context of endocrown preparation.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"69-77"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9223","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the trueness and precision of various intraoral scanners (IOSs) in relation to endocrown restorations.

Materials and methods: One mandibular molar was mounted within an acrylic resin block. The tooth was prepared for an endocrown restoration, involving a 2-mm cusp reduction, a 3.5-mm pulp chamber depth, and a butt-joint margin. The sample was scanned by three different IOSs (3Shape TRIOS 4, Carestream 3800, and Medit i700), with 10 scans taken by each and then converted into STL files. A high-precision scanner captured a reference scan, which was also converted into an STL file. Trueness was assessed by superimposing each sample scan onto the reference, while precision was determined by superimposing the STL files within each group. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey HSD post hoc test and Mann-Whitney U test (α = .05).

Results: The study found that TRIOS 4 exhibited the highest trueness (22.44 ± 15.01 μm), followed by Medit i700 (24.59 ± 12.80 μm) and CS 3800 (29.05 ± 7.75 μm). In terms of precision, CS 3800 had the best results (21.55 ± 8.87 μm), followed by Medit i700 (43.80 ± 17.42 μm) and TRIOS 4 (47.28 ± 13.93 μm). Only the differences between the precision of the CS 3800 and the other two scanners were statistically significant.

Conclusions: The study found that all three scanners had similar trueness, but CS 3800 had significantly better precision than the other two scanners. However, all of the scanners demonstrated acceptable levels of accuracy in the context of endocrown preparation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同口内扫描仪在牙冠修复中的准确性评价。
目的:本体外研究旨在评估各种口腔内扫描仪(iiss)在牙髓修复中的准确性和准确性。方法:将一颗人下颌磨牙固定在丙烯酸树脂块内。牙齿准备进行牙冠内修复,包括2毫米的牙尖复位,3.5毫米的牙髓腔深度和对接边缘。样本被三种不同的ios扫描(3Shape TRIOS 4、Carestream 3800和Medit i700),每种扫描10次,然后转换成STL文件。高精度扫描仪捕获了参考扫描,并将其转换为STL文件。通过将每个样本扫描叠加到参考文献上来评估真实性,而通过叠加每组内的STL文件来确定精度。统计学分析采用单因素方差分析,采用Tukey HSD事后检验和Mann Whitney U检验(α = 0.05)。结果:研究发现TRIOS 4的准确率最高。(22.44±15.01 μm),其次是Medit i700(24.59±12.80 μm)和CS 3800(29.05±7.75 μm)。CS 3800的测量精度最高(21.55±8.87 μm),其次是Medit i700(43.80±17.42 μm)和TRIOS 4(47.28±13.93 μm)。只有CS 3800和其他两种扫描仪之间的精度差异具有统计学意义。结论:研究发现三种扫描仪的准确率相似,但cs3800的准确率明显高于其他两种扫描仪。然而,所有的扫描仪在冠内准备的背景下显示出可接受的精度水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Marginal Gap and Fracture Resistance of Metal-Ceramic and Zirconia Crowns Fabricated by Additive and Subtractive Manufacturing Techniques. Fracture Resistance of 3D-Printed Restorations in Different Thicknesses for Primary Molars. Effect of Recycling Cobalt-Chromium Alloy Powder on Metal-Ceramic Bond Strength and Microstructure. Impact of Extrinsic Staining on the Physical Properties of Provisional Resins Fabricated by Digital and Conventional Methods-An In Situ Study. Tea and Cola Stainability of Full Veneer Crowns Constructed from Repressed Conventional and Novel Lithium Disilicate Ceramic Ingots: An In Vitro Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1