扫描体数量对全口种植体扫描的影响:2 个种植体与 4 个种植体的比较。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of Oral Implantology Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1563/aaid-joi-D-23-00063
Aly Abdelrehim, Nosizana Mohd Salleh, Hazrina Sofian, Eshamsul Sulaiman
{"title":"扫描体数量对全口种植体扫描的影响:2 个种植体与 4 个种植体的比较。","authors":"Aly Abdelrehim, Nosizana Mohd Salleh, Hazrina Sofian, Eshamsul Sulaiman","doi":"10.1563/aaid-joi-D-23-00063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Accuracy is a necessity in implant impressions to fabricate accurately fitting implant-supported prostheses. This in vitro study aimed to explore the impact of the number of scan bodies on scanning quality by comparing scans of 2 vs 4 implants, and to determine if their accuracy and precision meets acceptable clinical threshold. Two mandibular edentulous models were used: one with 4-parallel implants (4-IM) and the other with 2-parallel implants (2-IM). Each model was scanned 10 times with an intraoral scanner, while reference scans were obtained with a high-precision laboratory scanner. The accuracy of test scans was evaluated by superimposing them onto reference scans and measuring 3D and angular deviations of the scan bodies. To assess the precision, the repeatability of the scans was analyzed by measuring the 3D SDs. Independent t test was used to compare angular deviations, the Mann-Whitney U test was used for 3D deviations and 3D SDs, and 1 sample t test was used for comparing means to the clinical threshold. Angular and 3D deviations were statistically not significant between the 2 groups (P = .054 and 0.143). 3D deviation values were higher than the 150-µm threshold for 2-IM (201 µm) and 4-IM (290 µm); angular deviation in 2-IM was 0.600 degrees and 0.885 degrees for 4-IM. There was no statistically significant difference in the precision of scans between the 2 groups. (P = .161). Although scanning quality improved when 2 scan bodies were used, the difference was not statistically significant. Moreover, full-arch implant scanning did not meet acceptable levels of accuracy and precision.</p>","PeriodicalId":50101,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral Implantology","volume":" ","pages":"104-110"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of the Number of Scan Bodies on Full-Arch Implant Scanning: A Comparison of 2 vs 4 Implants.\",\"authors\":\"Aly Abdelrehim, Nosizana Mohd Salleh, Hazrina Sofian, Eshamsul Sulaiman\",\"doi\":\"10.1563/aaid-joi-D-23-00063\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Accuracy is a necessity in implant impressions to fabricate accurately fitting implant-supported prostheses. This in vitro study aimed to explore the impact of the number of scan bodies on scanning quality by comparing scans of 2 vs 4 implants, and to determine if their accuracy and precision meets acceptable clinical threshold. Two mandibular edentulous models were used: one with 4-parallel implants (4-IM) and the other with 2-parallel implants (2-IM). Each model was scanned 10 times with an intraoral scanner, while reference scans were obtained with a high-precision laboratory scanner. The accuracy of test scans was evaluated by superimposing them onto reference scans and measuring 3D and angular deviations of the scan bodies. To assess the precision, the repeatability of the scans was analyzed by measuring the 3D SDs. Independent t test was used to compare angular deviations, the Mann-Whitney U test was used for 3D deviations and 3D SDs, and 1 sample t test was used for comparing means to the clinical threshold. Angular and 3D deviations were statistically not significant between the 2 groups (P = .054 and 0.143). 3D deviation values were higher than the 150-µm threshold for 2-IM (201 µm) and 4-IM (290 µm); angular deviation in 2-IM was 0.600 degrees and 0.885 degrees for 4-IM. There was no statistically significant difference in the precision of scans between the 2 groups. (P = .161). Although scanning quality improved when 2 scan bodies were used, the difference was not statistically significant. Moreover, full-arch implant scanning did not meet acceptable levels of accuracy and precision.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50101,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Oral Implantology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"104-110\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Oral Implantology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-23-00063\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"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":"Journal of Oral Implantology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-23-00063","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

种植体印模的准确性是制作精确匹配的种植体支持修复体的必要条件。这项体外研究旨在通过比较 2 个种植体和 4 个种植体的扫描结果,探索扫描体数量对扫描质量的影响,并确定其准确性和精确度是否达到临床可接受的标准。我们使用了两个下颌无牙模型:一个是 4 个平行种植体(4-IM),另一个是 2 个平行种植体(2-IM)。每个模型使用口内扫描仪扫描十次,而参考扫描则使用高精度实验室扫描仪获得。通过将测试扫描叠加到参考扫描上,并测量扫描体的三维和角度偏差,来评估测试扫描的准确性。为了评估精确度,通过测量三维标准偏差分析了扫描的可重复性。角度偏差的比较采用独立 t 检验,三维偏差和三维标准偏差的比较采用 Mann-Whitney U 检验,平均值与临床阈值的比较采用单样本 t 检验。两组患者的角度偏差和三维偏差在统计学上无显著差异(P=0.054 和 0.143)。2-IM(201 μm)和 4-IM(290 μm)的三维偏差值高于 150 μm 的阈值;2-IM 的角度偏差为 0.600 度,4-IM 为 0.885 度。两组的扫描精度差异无统计学意义(P=0.161)。(P=0.161).虽然使用 2 个扫描体时扫描质量有所提高,但差异无统计学意义。此外,全拱种植体扫描的准确度和精确度均未达到可接受的水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Influence of the Number of Scan Bodies on Full-Arch Implant Scanning: A Comparison of 2 vs 4 Implants.

Accuracy is a necessity in implant impressions to fabricate accurately fitting implant-supported prostheses. This in vitro study aimed to explore the impact of the number of scan bodies on scanning quality by comparing scans of 2 vs 4 implants, and to determine if their accuracy and precision meets acceptable clinical threshold. Two mandibular edentulous models were used: one with 4-parallel implants (4-IM) and the other with 2-parallel implants (2-IM). Each model was scanned 10 times with an intraoral scanner, while reference scans were obtained with a high-precision laboratory scanner. The accuracy of test scans was evaluated by superimposing them onto reference scans and measuring 3D and angular deviations of the scan bodies. To assess the precision, the repeatability of the scans was analyzed by measuring the 3D SDs. Independent t test was used to compare angular deviations, the Mann-Whitney U test was used for 3D deviations and 3D SDs, and 1 sample t test was used for comparing means to the clinical threshold. Angular and 3D deviations were statistically not significant between the 2 groups (P = .054 and 0.143). 3D deviation values were higher than the 150-µm threshold for 2-IM (201 µm) and 4-IM (290 µm); angular deviation in 2-IM was 0.600 degrees and 0.885 degrees for 4-IM. There was no statistically significant difference in the precision of scans between the 2 groups. (P = .161). Although scanning quality improved when 2 scan bodies were used, the difference was not statistically significant. Moreover, full-arch implant scanning did not meet acceptable levels of accuracy and precision.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Oral Implantology
Journal of Oral Implantology DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
54
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The official publication of the American Academy of Implant Dentistry and of the American Academy of Implant Prosthodontics, is dedicated to providing valuable information to general dentists, oral surgeons, prosthodontists, periodontists, scientists, clinicians, laboratory owners and technicians, manufacturers, and educators. Implant basics, prosthetics, pharmaceuticals, the latest research in implantology, implant surgery, and advanced implant procedures are just some of the topics covered.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of Biomechanical Behaviors of Different Designs and Configurations of Titanium and Zirconium Dental Implants With Finite Elements Analysis in Anterior Maxilla. Enhancing Precision and Efficiency in Fabricating Complete Arch Screw-Retained Implant Prosthesis: A Clinical Case Report Utilizing the Nexus iOS Scan Gauge System. Reconstruction of the Fully Edentulous Maxilla Using Sinus Grafts and Bone Expansion: A Retrospective Analysis of 50 Consecutive Cases. All-on-4 Concept With Use Of Zygoma Implants for Rehabilitation in the Severely Atrophied Maxilla With a Definitive Immediate Restoration. Clinical Performance of 170 Frictional Morse Taper Implants: 2 Years Follow-Up.
×
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:481959085
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