Literature DB >> 27460324

Influence of object translucency on the scanning accuracy of a powder-free intraoral scanner: A laboratory study.

Hong Li1, Peijun Lyu2, Yong Wang3, Yuchun Sun4.   

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Limited information is available regarding the influence of object translucency on the scanning accuracy of a powder-free intraoral scanner.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the scanning accuracy of a confocal microscopy principle powder-free intraoral scanner on ceramic copings and to analyze the relationship between scanning accuracy and object translucency.
METHODS: Six slice specimens (12×10 mm) and 6 offset copings (1.00-mm thickness) were made from different translucent homogeneous ceramic blocks (CEREC Blocs, S0-M to S5-M, highest to lowest translucency). The primary sintered zirconia offset coping was produced in the same way as the control. Optical parameters related to the translucency of each slice were measured with a spectrophotometer. Three-dimensional (3D) datasets of the surface morphology of offset copings were obtained by using the intraoral scanner. The same white wax resin bases were used for registration. Quantitative parameters of scanning trueness and precision were measured. One-way ANOVA was used to analyze the values of each parameter among the 6 ceramic blocks. Bivariate correlation was used to analyze the relationships between each parameter of scanning accuracy and translucency (α=.05).
RESULTS: Translucent copings showed a positive 3D bias (S0-M to S5-M: 0.149 ±0.038 mm to 0.068 ±0.020 mm), a narrower collar diameter (Dd=-0.067 mm), larger convergence angle (ΔΦ=2.79 degrees), and larger curvature radius of the internal gingivoaxial corner (Δρ=0.236 mm). The smaller the percentage sum of scattering and absorption, the greater was the occurrence of scanning bias (r=-0.918) and curvature (r=-0.935) decrease.
CONCLUSIONS: Use of the tested powder-free intraoral scanner, higher translucency objects (greater translucency than S1-M/A1C) resulted in lower scanning accuracy and morphological changes. Therefore, more suitable methods of measurement are still required.
Copyright © 2016 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27460324     DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.04.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prosthet Dent        ISSN: 0022-3913            Impact factor:   3.426


  8 in total

1.  Effect of full arch two scanning techniques on the accuracy of overdenture conventional and CAD/CAM Co-Cr bars.

Authors:  Ali Alenezi; Mohammed Yehya; Mohamed Alkhodary
Journal:  Saudi Dent J       Date:  2022-08-28

2.  Influence of Scanning-Aid Materials on the Accuracy and Time Efficiency of Intraoral Scanners for Full-Arch Digital Scanning: An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Hyun-Su Oh; Young-Jun Lim; Bongju Kim; Myung-Joo Kim; Ho-Beom Kwon; Yeon-Wha Baek
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 3.623

3.  Method to evaluate the noise of 3D intra-oral scanner.

Authors:  Alban Desoutter; Osama Yusuf Solieman; Gérard Subsol; Hervé Tassery; Frédéric Cuisinier; Michel Fages
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Full-arch accuracy of five intraoral scanners: In vivo analysis of trueness and precision.

Authors:  Miran Kwon; Youngmok Cho; Dong-Wook Kim; MyungSu Kim; Yoon-Ji Kim; Minho Chang
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2021-03-25       Impact factor: 1.372

5.  Evaluating the accuracy of three intraoral scanners using models containing different numbers of crown-prepared abutments.

Authors:  Ting Zhang; Ting Wei; Yawen Zhao; Mengyang Jiang; Xiaojie Yin; Huiqiang Sun
Journal:  J Dent Sci       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 2.080

6.  The Effect of Scanning Strategy on Intraoral Scanner's Accuracy.

Authors:  Nikolaos A Gavounelis; Chrysoula-Maria C Gogola; Demetrios J Halazonetis
Journal:  Dent J (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-04

7.  Finish line distinctness and accuracy in 7 intraoral scanners versus conventional impression: an in vitro descriptive comparison.

Authors:  Robert Nedelcu; Pontus Olsson; Ingela Nyström; Andreas Thor
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2018-02-23       Impact factor: 2.757

8.  Accuracy on Scanned Images of Full Arch Models with Orthodontic Brackets by Various Intraoral Scanners in the Presence of Artificial Saliva.

Authors:  Jihu Song; Minji Kim
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-02-27       Impact factor: 3.411

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.