Francesco Grande, Giordano Celeghin, Federica Gallinaro, Nicola Mobilio, Santo Catapano
{"title":"全弓数字扫描与可扫描印模材料准确性的比较:体外研究。","authors":"Francesco Grande, Giordano Celeghin, Federica Gallinaro, Nicola Mobilio, Santo Catapano","doi":"10.23736/S2724-6329.23.04766-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In some clinical cases, full-arch impression could be difficult to take correctly with the digital way. Patients with high flow salivary rate or with difficulties in mouth opening can still benefit from a conventional impression with elastomer materials that can be directly or indirectly digitized. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and precision of two different intraoral scanners (IOSs) and an impression material with scannable properties, by means of three-dimensional analysis of a complete dental arch.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anatomical model of complete upper arch, modified with a Scan body placed in the retroincisive area, was used. It was firstly scanned by a desktop scanner to create a digital reference model. Then, 3 groups were created, each constituted by 5 samples. In the first group, 5 impressions were taken from the same master model with the scannable PVS material (Hydrorise Implant), 5 scans were taken using Trios4 (3Shape) and other 5 scans with iTero Element 5D (iTero). STL files obtained from IOSs, and scanned impressions were three-dimensionally superimposed on the STL file of the reference model using the Scan body geometry.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ANOVA Test (P<0.005) did not show any statistically significant difference between the accuracy and precision values of the groups. Each group shows clinically acceptable deviations from the reference model.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Scannable polyvinylsiloxane impression materials are equally accurate and precise as the two IOSs tested in full-arch dentate impressions.</p>","PeriodicalId":18709,"journal":{"name":"Minerva dental and oral science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the accuracy between full-arch digital scans and scannable impression materials: an in vitro study.\",\"authors\":\"Francesco Grande, Giordano Celeghin, Federica Gallinaro, Nicola Mobilio, Santo Catapano\",\"doi\":\"10.23736/S2724-6329.23.04766-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In some clinical cases, full-arch impression could be difficult to take correctly with the digital way. Patients with high flow salivary rate or with difficulties in mouth opening can still benefit from a conventional impression with elastomer materials that can be directly or indirectly digitized. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and precision of two different intraoral scanners (IOSs) and an impression material with scannable properties, by means of three-dimensional analysis of a complete dental arch.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anatomical model of complete upper arch, modified with a Scan body placed in the retroincisive area, was used. It was firstly scanned by a desktop scanner to create a digital reference model. Then, 3 groups were created, each constituted by 5 samples. In the first group, 5 impressions were taken from the same master model with the scannable PVS material (Hydrorise Implant), 5 scans were taken using Trios4 (3Shape) and other 5 scans with iTero Element 5D (iTero). STL files obtained from IOSs, and scanned impressions were three-dimensionally superimposed on the STL file of the reference model using the Scan body geometry.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ANOVA Test (P<0.005) did not show any statistically significant difference between the accuracy and precision values of the groups. Each group shows clinically acceptable deviations from the reference model.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Scannable polyvinylsiloxane impression materials are equally accurate and precise as the two IOSs tested in full-arch dentate impressions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18709,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva dental and oral science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minerva dental and oral science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6329.23.04766-6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva dental and oral science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6329.23.04766-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
背景:在一些临床病例中,全弓印模可能难以用数字方式正确拍摄。高流涎率或开口困难的患者仍然可以从传统的弹性体材料印模中受益,这些材料可以直接或间接地数字化。本研究的目的是通过对完整牙弓的三维分析,比较两种不同的口腔内扫描仪(ios)和具有可扫描特性的印模材料的准确性和精密度。方法:采用完整上弓解剖模型,将扫描体置于切后区。首先用台式扫描仪对其进行扫描,以创建数字参考模型。然后分为3组,每组5个样本。在第一组中,使用可扫描的PVS材料(Hydrorise Implant)从同一主模型上取5个印象,使用Trios4 (3Shape)进行5次扫描,使用iTero Element 5D (iTero)进行5次扫描。利用扫描体几何图形将从iss获取的STL文件和扫描印痕三维叠加在参考模型STL文件上。结果:方差分析(ANOVA)检验(p)结论:可扫描的聚乙烯硅氧烷印模材料在全牙弓齿状印模中与两种iss测试同样准确和精确。
Comparison of the accuracy between full-arch digital scans and scannable impression materials: an in vitro study.
Background: In some clinical cases, full-arch impression could be difficult to take correctly with the digital way. Patients with high flow salivary rate or with difficulties in mouth opening can still benefit from a conventional impression with elastomer materials that can be directly or indirectly digitized. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and precision of two different intraoral scanners (IOSs) and an impression material with scannable properties, by means of three-dimensional analysis of a complete dental arch.
Methods: An anatomical model of complete upper arch, modified with a Scan body placed in the retroincisive area, was used. It was firstly scanned by a desktop scanner to create a digital reference model. Then, 3 groups were created, each constituted by 5 samples. In the first group, 5 impressions were taken from the same master model with the scannable PVS material (Hydrorise Implant), 5 scans were taken using Trios4 (3Shape) and other 5 scans with iTero Element 5D (iTero). STL files obtained from IOSs, and scanned impressions were three-dimensionally superimposed on the STL file of the reference model using the Scan body geometry.
Results: The ANOVA Test (P<0.005) did not show any statistically significant difference between the accuracy and precision values of the groups. Each group shows clinically acceptable deviations from the reference model.
Conclusions: Scannable polyvinylsiloxane impression materials are equally accurate and precise as the two IOSs tested in full-arch dentate impressions.