Differences between laboratory scanner and intra-oral scanner regarding axes and distances of three implants in a curved line when using two types of intra-oral scan bodies: in vitro study.

IF 4 3区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE International Journal of Implant Dentistry Pub Date : 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1186/s40729-025-00617-7
Gil Ben-Izhack, Diva Lugassy, Joseph Nissan, Fatmi Safadi, Tal Shirazi, Yifat Manor, Asaf Shely
{"title":"Differences between laboratory scanner and intra-oral scanner regarding axes and distances of three implants in a curved line when using two types of intra-oral scan bodies: in vitro study.","authors":"Gil Ben-Izhack, Diva Lugassy, Joseph Nissan, Fatmi Safadi, Tal Shirazi, Yifat Manor, Asaf Shely","doi":"10.1186/s40729-025-00617-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in the intra-implant distance, inter-implant distance, intra-implant axis and inter-implant axis of two different intra-oral scan bodies (ISBs) which are connected to three implants in a curved line by comparing laboratory scanner (LBS) versus an intra-oral scanner (IOS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Printed model with three internal hexagon implant analogs at the locations of 12#, 13#, and 14# was produced. Two ISBs, MIS Dentsply Sirona (MIS) and Zirkonzhan (ZZ), with different geometries (MIS trapezoid, ZZ cylindrical) were scanned one time by using LBS (master model) followed by thirty scans with IOS. After each scan a stereolithography (STL) file was produced and each IOS STL file was superimposed with the LBS STL file (master model) by using three-dimensional (3D) analysis software PolyWorks<sup>®</sup>2020. A Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was performed followed by a Mann-Whitney test (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean errors for inter-implant distance were significantly lower for MIS compared to the ZZ (p < 0.05). In contrast, mean errors for intra-implant angle were significantly lower for ZZ compared to MIS (p < 0.05). Mean error for inter-implant angle was significantly lower for MIS compared to ZZ only between 12# to 14# and no difference was found between the other couples (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ISB geometry influenced all four parameters: intra-implant distance, intra-implant angle, inter-implant distance and inter-implant angle. MIS ISB trapezoid geometry resulted significantly lower mean error regarding most parameters except intra-implant angle. ZZ ISB cylindrical geometry had a good impact only on the intra-implant angle.</p>","PeriodicalId":14076,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Implant Dentistry","volume":"11 1","pages":"27"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11961802/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Implant Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00617-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in the intra-implant distance, inter-implant distance, intra-implant axis and inter-implant axis of two different intra-oral scan bodies (ISBs) which are connected to three implants in a curved line by comparing laboratory scanner (LBS) versus an intra-oral scanner (IOS).

Methods: Printed model with three internal hexagon implant analogs at the locations of 12#, 13#, and 14# was produced. Two ISBs, MIS Dentsply Sirona (MIS) and Zirkonzhan (ZZ), with different geometries (MIS trapezoid, ZZ cylindrical) were scanned one time by using LBS (master model) followed by thirty scans with IOS. After each scan a stereolithography (STL) file was produced and each IOS STL file was superimposed with the LBS STL file (master model) by using three-dimensional (3D) analysis software PolyWorks®2020. A Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was performed followed by a Mann-Whitney test (p < 0.05).

Results: Mean errors for inter-implant distance were significantly lower for MIS compared to the ZZ (p < 0.05). In contrast, mean errors for intra-implant angle were significantly lower for ZZ compared to MIS (p < 0.05). Mean error for inter-implant angle was significantly lower for MIS compared to ZZ only between 12# to 14# and no difference was found between the other couples (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: ISB geometry influenced all four parameters: intra-implant distance, intra-implant angle, inter-implant distance and inter-implant angle. MIS ISB trapezoid geometry resulted significantly lower mean error regarding most parameters except intra-implant angle. ZZ ISB cylindrical geometry had a good impact only on the intra-implant angle.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
实验室扫描仪和口腔内扫描仪在使用两种类型的口腔内扫描体时关于三个种植体在曲线上的轴和距离的差异:体外研究。
背景:本研究的目的是通过比较实验室扫描仪(LBS)和口腔扫描仪(IOS),评估两种不同的口腔内扫描体(ISBs)与三个种植体在一条曲线上连接的种植体内距离、种植体间距离、种植体内轴和种植体间轴的差异。方法:在12#、13#、14#位置制作3个内六边形植入物的打印模型。采用主模型(LBS)对不同几何形状(MIS为梯形,ZZ为圆柱形)的两个ISBs MIS Dentsply Sirona (MIS)和Zirkonzhan (ZZ)进行了一次扫描,随后用IOS进行了30次扫描。每次扫描后生成一个立体光刻(STL)文件,并使用三维(3D)分析软件PolyWorks®2020将每个IOS STL文件与LBS STL文件(主模型)叠加。在进行Kolmogorov-Smirnov检验后进行Mann-Whitney检验(p)。结果:与ZZ相比,MIS的种植体间距离的平均误差显著降低(p)。结论:ISB几何形状影响所有四个参数:种植体内距离、种植体内角度、种植体间距离和种植体间角度。MIS ISB梯形除种植体内角度外,大多数参数的平均误差显著降低。ZZ - ISB圆柱形几何只对种植体内角度有良好的影响。
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
International Journal of Implant Dentistry
International Journal of Implant Dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
53
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Implant Dentistry is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the SpringerOpen brand. The journal is dedicated to promoting the exchange and discussion of all research areas relevant to implant dentistry in the form of systematic literature or invited reviews, prospective and retrospective clinical studies, clinical case reports, basic laboratory and animal research, and articles on material research and engineering.
期刊最新文献
Current treatment concepts in implantology in oral and maxillofacial surgery in Germany. Matching accuracy between CT images and intraoral surface scans using glass-ceramic markers compared to gutta-percha markers. Clinical performance and occlusal wear of polymer-infiltrated ceramic network and zirconia-reinforced ceramic implant-supported single crowns fabricated via a digital workflow on two titanium implant systems: a 12-month prospective randomized trial. Evaluation of the composite materials mixed with calcium phosphate cement and β-tricalcium phosphate granules. Impact of soft-tissue management techniques on immediate implant placement: a randomized controlled trial.
×
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