Influence of Horizontal Intraoral Scan Bodies on the Trueness of Digital Impressions for Complete-Arch Prostheses on Four Implants: An In Vitro Evaluation

IF 5.3 1区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Andrea Laureti, Tiago Marques, João Pitta, Vincent Fehmer, Irena Sailer, Alessandro Pozzi, Luís Azevedo
{"title":"Influence of Horizontal Intraoral Scan Bodies on the Trueness of Digital Impressions for Complete-Arch Prostheses on Four Implants: An In Vitro Evaluation","authors":"Andrea Laureti,&nbsp;Tiago Marques,&nbsp;João Pitta,&nbsp;Vincent Fehmer,&nbsp;Irena Sailer,&nbsp;Alessandro Pozzi,&nbsp;Luís Azevedo","doi":"10.1111/clr.70001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To assess the impact of horizontal intraoral scan bodies (H-ISBs) on the trueness of complete-arch digital impressions compared to vertical ISBs (V-ISBs). To evaluate trueness among four intraoral scanners (IOS) and inter-operator variability across different ISB × IOS combinations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Digital impressions were made from a dental cast with four multi-unit analogs using four H-ISBs: H-NB, H-NS, H-M6, H-SF, and a V-ISB (V-EA) as a comparison. Two operators performed 10 scans per ISB with four IOS devices (i5D, PS, T3, T4), generating 400 impressions. Reference scans were obtained with a desktop scanner, and trueness was analyzed using root-mean-square (RMS) error calculations (<i>α</i> = 0.05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>H-NS and H-SF exhibited the highest trueness across IOSs, whereas H-NB and H-M6 showed lower trueness. V-EA outperformed H-NB and H-M6 but not H-NS and H-SF. Significant IOS-ISB interaction effects (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01) indicated H-SF as the most accurate, especially with PS. T4 and i5D displayed greater variability, particularly with H-NB. V-ISBs exhibited higher inter-operator variability compared to H-ISBs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>H-ISBs did not perform better than V-ISBs in all scenarios. The interactions among ISB design, IOS type, and operator significantly affect the digital impression trueness. The discrepancies measured among the systems remain well below the currently accepted threshold for clinically relevant misfit, supporting the suitability of the horizontal configuration for complete-arch impressions.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":"36 10","pages":"1287-1295"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/clr.70001","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.70001","RegionNum":1,"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

Abstract

Objective

To assess the impact of horizontal intraoral scan bodies (H-ISBs) on the trueness of complete-arch digital impressions compared to vertical ISBs (V-ISBs). To evaluate trueness among four intraoral scanners (IOS) and inter-operator variability across different ISB × IOS combinations.

Materials and Methods

Digital impressions were made from a dental cast with four multi-unit analogs using four H-ISBs: H-NB, H-NS, H-M6, H-SF, and a V-ISB (V-EA) as a comparison. Two operators performed 10 scans per ISB with four IOS devices (i5D, PS, T3, T4), generating 400 impressions. Reference scans were obtained with a desktop scanner, and trueness was analyzed using root-mean-square (RMS) error calculations (α = 0.05).

Results

H-NS and H-SF exhibited the highest trueness across IOSs, whereas H-NB and H-M6 showed lower trueness. V-EA outperformed H-NB and H-M6 but not H-NS and H-SF. Significant IOS-ISB interaction effects (p < 0.01) indicated H-SF as the most accurate, especially with PS. T4 and i5D displayed greater variability, particularly with H-NB. V-ISBs exhibited higher inter-operator variability compared to H-ISBs.

Conclusions

H-ISBs did not perform better than V-ISBs in all scenarios. The interactions among ISB design, IOS type, and operator significantly affect the digital impression trueness. The discrepancies measured among the systems remain well below the currently accepted threshold for clinically relevant misfit, supporting the suitability of the horizontal configuration for complete-arch impressions.

Abstract Image

水平口内扫描体对四种种植体全弓修复体数字印象真实性的影响:体外评估。
目的评价水平口内扫描体(H-ISBs)与垂直口内扫描体(V-ISBs)对全弓数字印模准确性的影响。评估四种口腔内扫描仪(IOS)的准确性和不同ISB × IOS组合的操作者之间的差异。材料和方法采用四种h - isb: H-NB, H-NS, H-M6, H-SF和V-ISB (V-EA)作为比较,用四种多单元类似物的牙模制作数字印模。两名操作人员使用4台IOS设备(i5D、PS、T3、T4)对每个ISB进行了10次扫描,产生了400次印象。使用台式扫描仪获得参考扫描结果,采用均方根误差(RMS)计算分析准确率(α = 0.05)。结果H-NB和H-M6的准确率较低,h - ns和H-SF的准确率最高。V-EA优于H-NB和H-M6,但优于H-NS和H-SF。显著的IOS-ISB相互作用效应(p < 0.01)表明H-SF最准确,特别是PS。T4和i5D表现出更大的变异性,特别是H-NB。与H-ISBs相比,V-ISBs表现出更高的操作员间变异性。结论sh - isbs在所有情况下的表现均不优于V-ISBs。ISB设计、IOS类型和操作人员之间的交互作用显著影响数字印象的真实性。系统之间测量的差异仍然远远低于目前临床相关不匹配的可接受阈值,支持水平配置对完全弓印模的适用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Clinical Oral Implants Research 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
11.60%
发文量
149
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Oral Implants Research conveys scientific progress in the field of implant dentistry and its related areas to clinicians, teachers and researchers concerned with the application of this information for the benefit of patients in need of oral implants. The journal addresses itself to clinicians, general practitioners, periodontists, oral and maxillofacial surgeons and prosthodontists, as well as to teachers, academicians and scholars involved in the education of professionals and in the scientific promotion of the field of implant dentistry.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信