OBJECTIVES: To compare the exactness of simulated clinical impressions and stone replicas of crown preparations, using digitization and virtual three-dimensional analysis. METHODS: Three master dies (mandibular incisor, canine and molar) were prepared for full crowns, mounted in full dental arches in a plane line articulator. Eight impressions were taken using an experimental monophase vinyl polysiloxane-based material. Stone replicas were poured in type IV stone (Vel-Mix Stone; Kerr). The master dies and the stone replicas were digitized in a touch-probe scanner (Procera) Forte; Nobel Biocare AB) and the impressions in a laser scanner (D250, 3Shape A/S), to create virtual models. The resulting point-clouds from the digitization of the master dies were used as CAD-Reference-Models (CRM). Discrepancies between the points in the pointclouds and the corresponding CRM were measured by a matching-software (CopyCAD 6.504 SP2; Delcam Plc). The distribution of the discrepancies was analyzed and depicted on color-difference maps. RESULTS: The discrepancies of the digitized impressions and the stone replicas compared to the CRM were of similar size with a mean+/-SD within 40microm, with the exception of two of the digitized molar impressions. The precision of the digitized impressions and stone replicas did not differ significantly (F=4.2; p=0.053). However, the shape affected the digitization (F=5.4; p=0.013) and the interaction effect of shape and digitization source (impression or stone replica) was pronounced (F=28; p<0.0001). The reliability was high for both digitization methods, evaluated by repeated digitizations. SIGNIFICANCE: The exactness of the digitized impressions varied with shape. Both impressions and stone replicas can be digitized repeatedly with a high reliability.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the exactness of simulated clinical impressions and stone replicas of crown preparations, using digitization and virtual three-dimensional analysis. METHODS: Three master dies (mandibular incisor, canine and molar) were prepared for full crowns, mounted in full dental arches in a plane line articulator. Eight impressions were taken using an experimental monophase vinyl polysiloxane-based material. Stone replicas were poured in type IV stone (Vel-Mix Stone; Kerr). The master dies and the stone replicas were digitized in a touch-probe scanner (Procera) Forte; Nobel Biocare AB) and the impressions in a laser scanner (D250, 3Shape A/S), to create virtual models. The resulting point-clouds from the digitization of the master dies were used as CAD-Reference-Models (CRM). Discrepancies between the points in the pointclouds and the corresponding CRM were measured by a matching-software (CopyCAD 6.504 SP2; Delcam Plc). The distribution of the discrepancies was analyzed and depicted on color-difference maps. RESULTS: The discrepancies of the digitized impressions and the stone replicas compared to the CRM were of similar size with a mean+/-SD within 40microm, with the exception of two of the digitized molar impressions. The precision of the digitized impressions and stone replicas did not differ significantly (F=4.2; p=0.053). However, the shape affected the digitization (F=5.4; p=0.013) and the interaction effect of shape and digitization source (impression or stone replica) was pronounced (F=28; p<0.0001). The reliability was high for both digitization methods, evaluated by repeated digitizations. SIGNIFICANCE: The exactness of the digitized impressions varied with shape. Both impressions and stone replicas can be digitized repeatedly with a high reliability.