Literature DB >> 31743331

Trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position.

Ryan Jin-Young Kim1, Goran I Benic2, Ji-Man Park3.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the trueness of 5 intraoral scanners (IOSs) for digital impression of simulated implant scan bodies in a partially edentulous model. A 3D printed partially edentulous mandible model made of Co-Cr with a total of 6 bilaterally positioned cylinders in the canine, second premolar, and second molar area served as the study model. Digital scans of the model were made with a reference scanner (steroSCAN neo) and 5 IOSs (CEREC Omnicam, CS3600, i500, iTero Element, and TRIOS 3) (n = 10). For each IOS's dataset, the XYZ coordinates of the cylinders were obtained from the reference point and the deviations from the reference scanner were calculated using a 3D reverse engineering program (Rapidform). The trueness values were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney post hoc test. Direction and amount of deviation differed among cylinder position and among IOSs. Regardless of the IOS type, the cylinders positioned on the left second molar, nearest to the scanning start point, showed the smallest deviation. The deviation generally increased further away from scanning start point towards the right second molar. TRIOS 3 and i500 outperformed the other IOSs for partially edentulous digital impression. The accuracy of the CEREC Omnicam, CS3600, and iTero Element were similar on the left side, but they showed more deviations on the right side of the arch when compared to the other IOSs. The accuracy of IOS is still an area that needs to be improved.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31743331     DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222070

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  7 in total

1.  In Vitro Comparison of Three Intraoral Scanners for Implant-Supported Dental Prostheses.

Authors:  Vitória Costa; António Sérgio Silva; Rosana Costa; Pedro Barreiros; Joana Mendes; José Manuel Mendes
Journal:  Dent J (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-15

2.  Comparison of the accuracy of different impression procedures in case of multiple and angulated implants : Accuracy of impressions in multiple and angulated implants.

Authors:  M Wafa Richi; Sevcan Kurtulmus-Yilmaz; Oguz Ozan
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 2.151

3.  Trueness of ten intraoral scanners in determining the positions of simulated implant scan bodies.

Authors:  Ryan Jin Young Kim; Goran I Benic; Ji-Man Park
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-28       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 4.  The direct digital workflow in fixed implant prosthodontics: a narrative review.

Authors:  George Michelinakis; Dimitrios Apostolakis; Phophi Kamposiora; George Papavasiliou; Mutlu Özcan
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2021-01-21       Impact factor: 2.757

5.  Effect of Implant Angulation on the Rotational Displacement of a 3-Unit Bridge after Digital Impression.

Authors:  Mahnaz Arshad; Amirmohsen Asgari; Mohamad Javad Kharazifard; Narges Ameri
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2022-01-25

Review 6.  Trueness and precision of digital implant impressions by intraoral scanners: a literature review.

Authors:  Minoru Sanda; Keita Miyoshi; Kazuyoshi Baba
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-07-27

7.  Bias Evaluation of the Accuracy of Two Extraoral Scanners and an Intraoral Scanner Based on ADA Standards.

Authors:  Naiyu Cui; Jiayin Wang; Xingyu Hou; Shixun Sun; Qixuan Huang; Ho-Kyung Lim; HongXin Cai; Qi Jia; Eui-Seok Lee; Heng Bo Jiang
Journal:  Scanning       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 1.932

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.