使用不同类型 3D 打印印模托盘时聚醚和乙烯基聚硅氧烷印模的准确性 - 一项体外研究。

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Clinical Oral Investigations Pub Date : 2024-09-30 DOI:10.1007/s00784-024-05962-2
Stefan Rues, David Depré, Thomas Stober, Peter Rammelsberg, Andreas Zenthöfer
{"title":"使用不同类型 3D 打印印模托盘时聚醚和乙烯基聚硅氧烷印模的准确性 - 一项体外研究。","authors":"Stefan Rues, David Depré, Thomas Stober, Peter Rammelsberg, Andreas Zenthöfer","doi":"10.1007/s00784-024-05962-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate dimensional accuracy of polyether (PE) and vinylpolysiloxane (VPS) impressions taken with manually fabricated and 3D-printed trays.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>To evaluate impression accuracy, highly precise digital data of a metallic lower jaw model with prepared teeth (regions 34 and 36), an implant (region 47) and three precision balls placed occlusally along the dental arch served as reference. PE (Impregum, 3M Oral Care) and VPS (Aquasil, Dentsply Sirona) impressions (n = 10/group) were taken with trays fabricated using different materials and manufacturing techniques (FDM: filament deposition modeling, material: Arfona Tray, Arfona; printer: Pro2, Raise3D; DLP: digital light processing, material: V-Print Tray, VOCO, printer: Max, Asiga; MPR: manual processing with light-curing plates, material: LC Tray, Müller-Omicron) including an open implant impression. Scans of resulting stone models were compared with the reference situation. Global distance and angular deviations as well as local trueness and precision for abutment teeth and scan abutment were computed. Possible statistical effects were analyzed using ANOVA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinically acceptable global accuracy was found (all mean absolute distance changes < 100 μm) and local accuracy for single abutments was excellent. All factors (abutment type, impression material, tray material) affected global accuracy (p < 0.05). In particular with PE impressions, MPR trays led to the best accuracies, both in horizontal and vertical direction.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Within the limitations of this in vitro study, impression accuracy was high in use of both polyether and vinylpolysiloxane combined with different 3D-printed and customized trays making them recommendable for at least impressions for smaller fixed dental prostheses. Manually fabricated trays were overall still the best choice if utmost precision is required.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Based on the results of this study, use of innovative CAD-CAM fabrication of individual impression trays fulfills the perquisites to be a viable option for impression making. In the sense of translational research, performance should be proved in a clinical setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":10461,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Investigations","volume":"28 10","pages":"560"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11442511/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of polyether and vinylpolysiloxane impressions when using different types of 3D-printed impression trays - an in vitro study.\",\"authors\":\"Stefan Rues, David Depré, Thomas Stober, Peter Rammelsberg, Andreas Zenthöfer\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00784-024-05962-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate dimensional accuracy of polyether (PE) and vinylpolysiloxane (VPS) impressions taken with manually fabricated and 3D-printed trays.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>To evaluate impression accuracy, highly precise digital data of a metallic lower jaw model with prepared teeth (regions 34 and 36), an implant (region 47) and three precision balls placed occlusally along the dental arch served as reference. PE (Impregum, 3M Oral Care) and VPS (Aquasil, Dentsply Sirona) impressions (n = 10/group) were taken with trays fabricated using different materials and manufacturing techniques (FDM: filament deposition modeling, material: Arfona Tray, Arfona; printer: Pro2, Raise3D; DLP: digital light processing, material: V-Print Tray, VOCO, printer: Max, Asiga; MPR: manual processing with light-curing plates, material: LC Tray, Müller-Omicron) including an open implant impression. Scans of resulting stone models were compared with the reference situation. Global distance and angular deviations as well as local trueness and precision for abutment teeth and scan abutment were computed. Possible statistical effects were analyzed using ANOVA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinically acceptable global accuracy was found (all mean absolute distance changes < 100 μm) and local accuracy for single abutments was excellent. All factors (abutment type, impression material, tray material) affected global accuracy (p < 0.05). In particular with PE impressions, MPR trays led to the best accuracies, both in horizontal and vertical direction.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Within the limitations of this in vitro study, impression accuracy was high in use of both polyether and vinylpolysiloxane combined with different 3D-printed and customized trays making them recommendable for at least impressions for smaller fixed dental prostheses. Manually fabricated trays were overall still the best choice if utmost precision is required.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Based on the results of this study, use of innovative CAD-CAM fabrication of individual impression trays fulfills the perquisites to be a viable option for impression making. In the sense of translational research, performance should be proved in a clinical setting.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10461,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Oral Investigations\",\"volume\":\"28 10\",\"pages\":\"560\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11442511/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Oral Investigations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05962-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Investigations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05962-2","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要

目的研究使用手工制造和三维打印托盘制作的聚醚(PE)和乙烯基聚硅氧烷(VPS)印模的尺寸精度:为了评估印模的准确性,以金属下颌模型的高精度数字数据为参考,该模型包含准备好的牙齿(34 和 36 区)、种植体(47 区)和沿牙弓咬合方向放置的三个精密球。在使用不同材料和制造技术(FDM:长丝沉积建模,材料:Arfona Tray,Arfona,Dentsply Sirona)制作的托盘上取 PE(Impregum,3M Oral Care)和 VPS(Aquasil,Dentsply Sirona)印模(n = 10/组):Arfona托盘,Arfona;打印机:Pro2,Raise3D;DLP:数字光处理,材料:V-Print托盘,VOCO,打印机:Max,Asiga;MPR:使用光固化板进行手动加工,材料:LC Tray,Müller,Asiga;打印机:Pro2,Raise3D:LC托盘,Müller-Omicron),包括开放式种植体印模。将生成的结石模型的扫描结果与参考情况进行比较。计算了基牙和扫描基台的整体距离和角度偏差以及局部真实度和精度。使用方差分析对可能的统计影响进行了分析:结果:发现了临床上可接受的整体精度(所有平均绝对距离变化结论):在这项体外研究的局限性范围内,聚醚和乙烯基聚硅氧烷与不同的 3D 打印和定制托盘结合使用时,印模准确性都很高,因此至少在较小的固定义齿印模中值得推荐。如果需要最高精度,手工制作的托盘总体上仍是最佳选择:根据这项研究的结果,使用创新的 CAD-CAM 制作个人印模托盘符合印模制作的前提条件。就转化研究而言,其性能应在临床环境中得到验证。
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
Accuracy of polyether and vinylpolysiloxane impressions when using different types of 3D-printed impression trays - an in vitro study.

Objectives: To investigate dimensional accuracy of polyether (PE) and vinylpolysiloxane (VPS) impressions taken with manually fabricated and 3D-printed trays.

Materials and methods: To evaluate impression accuracy, highly precise digital data of a metallic lower jaw model with prepared teeth (regions 34 and 36), an implant (region 47) and three precision balls placed occlusally along the dental arch served as reference. PE (Impregum, 3M Oral Care) and VPS (Aquasil, Dentsply Sirona) impressions (n = 10/group) were taken with trays fabricated using different materials and manufacturing techniques (FDM: filament deposition modeling, material: Arfona Tray, Arfona; printer: Pro2, Raise3D; DLP: digital light processing, material: V-Print Tray, VOCO, printer: Max, Asiga; MPR: manual processing with light-curing plates, material: LC Tray, Müller-Omicron) including an open implant impression. Scans of resulting stone models were compared with the reference situation. Global distance and angular deviations as well as local trueness and precision for abutment teeth and scan abutment were computed. Possible statistical effects were analyzed using ANOVA.

Results: Clinically acceptable global accuracy was found (all mean absolute distance changes < 100 μm) and local accuracy for single abutments was excellent. All factors (abutment type, impression material, tray material) affected global accuracy (p < 0.05). In particular with PE impressions, MPR trays led to the best accuracies, both in horizontal and vertical direction.

Conclusions: Within the limitations of this in vitro study, impression accuracy was high in use of both polyether and vinylpolysiloxane combined with different 3D-printed and customized trays making them recommendable for at least impressions for smaller fixed dental prostheses. Manually fabricated trays were overall still the best choice if utmost precision is required.

Clinical relevance: Based on the results of this study, use of innovative CAD-CAM fabrication of individual impression trays fulfills the perquisites to be a viable option for impression making. In the sense of translational research, performance should be proved in a clinical setting.

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
Clinical Oral Investigations
Clinical Oral Investigations 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
484
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The journal Clinical Oral Investigations is a multidisciplinary, international forum for publication of research from all fields of oral medicine. The journal publishes original scientific articles and invited reviews which provide up-to-date results of basic and clinical studies in oral and maxillofacial science and medicine. The aim is to clarify the relevance of new results to modern practice, for an international readership. Coverage includes maxillofacial and oral surgery, prosthetics and restorative dentistry, operative dentistry, endodontics, periodontology, orthodontics, dental materials science, clinical trials, epidemiology, pedodontics, oral implant, preventive dentistiry, oral pathology, oral basic sciences and more.
期刊最新文献
A technical note on the Kamranmeter; a manually operated device for measuring salivary spinnbarkeit. The clinical and microbiological efficacy of a zinc-citrate/hydroxyapatite/potassium-citrate containing toothpaste: a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial. Fluorescence and color adjustment potentials of paste-type and flowable resin composites in cervical restorations. AI-driven segmentation of the pulp cavity system in mandibular molars on CBCT images using convolutional neural networks. Automatic detection and proximity quantification of inferior alveolar nerve and mandibular third molar on cone-beam computed tomography.
×
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