Digitized Physical Impressions Optimize Apical Adaptation of Bio-Root Inlays for Apexification: A Comparison of Four Impression Techniques.

IF 3.4 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Yasser Alsayed Tolibah, Wahid Juha, Mhd Kheir Awad, Mohammad Tamer Abbara, Marwan Alhaji, Jihad Abou Nassar, Osama Aljabban, Nada Bshara, Ziad D Baghdadi
{"title":"Digitized Physical Impressions Optimize Apical Adaptation of Bio-Root Inlays for Apexification: A Comparison of Four Impression Techniques.","authors":"Yasser Alsayed Tolibah, Wahid Juha, Mhd Kheir Awad, Mohammad Tamer Abbara, Marwan Alhaji, Jihad Abou Nassar, Osama Aljabban, Nada Bshara, Ziad D Baghdadi","doi":"10.3390/dj14090568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objectives</b>: To evaluate the three-dimensional adaptation of prefabricated Bio-Root inlays fabricated from impressions of simulated immature permanent root canals using four techniques: direct intraoral scanning (A), a light-body rubber impression digitized with an intraoral scanner (B), cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based design (C), and a conventional indirect technique (D). <b>Methods</b>: Ten standardized simulated immature roots (extracted mandibular premolars prepared to a 1.5 mm apical diameter and 10 mm length) were used in a within-specimen comparative design, with each root receiving inlays fabricated by all four techniques. After fabrication and seating of the bioceramic inlays, the void percentage around each inlay was quantified by CBCT at the coronal, middle, and apical thirds relative to the baseline empty-canal volume. Data were analyzed using the Friedman, Wilcoxon signed-rank (Bonferroni-corrected), and linear mixed-model tests (α = 0.05). <b>Results</b>: Technique significantly affected void percentage (F(3,98) = 12.87, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Pooled across all canal thirds, Technique B had the lowest median void percentage (6.00 [7.00]), followed by A (8.00 [8.75]), C (12.00 [12.50]), and D (12.00 [19.00]). Independently of technique, the median void percentage increased from the coronal (6.00) to the middle (11.00) and apical (19.00) thirds. Differences among techniques were non-significant coronally (<i>p</i> = 0.437) but significant in the middle (<i>p</i> = 0.014) and apical (<i>p</i> < 0.001) thirds, with Technique B providing the best apical adaptation. <b>Conclusions</b>: The impression method significantly affected inlay adaptation. A light-body rubber impression digitized with an intraoral scanner yielded the best overall and apical fit, supporting digital workflows, particularly those using digitized physical impressions, for apexification. Adaptation deteriorated toward the apex regardless of technique.</p>","PeriodicalId":11269,"journal":{"name":"Dentistry Journal","volume":"14 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13606010/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dentistry Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/dj14090568","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the three-dimensional adaptation of prefabricated Bio-Root inlays fabricated from impressions of simulated immature permanent root canals using four techniques: direct intraoral scanning (A), a light-body rubber impression digitized with an intraoral scanner (B), cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based design (C), and a conventional indirect technique (D). Methods: Ten standardized simulated immature roots (extracted mandibular premolars prepared to a 1.5 mm apical diameter and 10 mm length) were used in a within-specimen comparative design, with each root receiving inlays fabricated by all four techniques. After fabrication and seating of the bioceramic inlays, the void percentage around each inlay was quantified by CBCT at the coronal, middle, and apical thirds relative to the baseline empty-canal volume. Data were analyzed using the Friedman, Wilcoxon signed-rank (Bonferroni-corrected), and linear mixed-model tests (α = 0.05). Results: Technique significantly affected void percentage (F(3,98) = 12.87, p < 0.001). Pooled across all canal thirds, Technique B had the lowest median void percentage (6.00 [7.00]), followed by A (8.00 [8.75]), C (12.00 [12.50]), and D (12.00 [19.00]). Independently of technique, the median void percentage increased from the coronal (6.00) to the middle (11.00) and apical (19.00) thirds. Differences among techniques were non-significant coronally (p = 0.437) but significant in the middle (p = 0.014) and apical (p < 0.001) thirds, with Technique B providing the best apical adaptation. Conclusions: The impression method significantly affected inlay adaptation. A light-body rubber impression digitized with an intraoral scanner yielded the best overall and apical fit, supporting digital workflows, particularly those using digitized physical impressions, for apexification. Adaptation deteriorated toward the apex regardless of technique.

数字化物理印模优化生物根嵌体的根尖适应:四种印模技术的比较。
目的:通过四种技术评估由模拟未成熟永久根管印模制成的预制Bio-Root嵌体的三维适应性:直接口内扫描(A)、用口内扫描仪数字化的轻体橡胶印模(B)、基于锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)的设计(C)和传统间接技术(D)。方法:采用10个标准化的模拟未成熟牙根(提取的下颌前磨牙制备成1.5 mm的根尖直径和10 mm的长度)进行标本内比较设计,每个牙根接受由所有四种技术制作的嵌体。在生物陶瓷嵌体制作和固定后,每个嵌体周围的空隙率通过CBCT在冠状、中间和根尖三分之一处相对于基线空管体积进行量化。采用Friedman、Wilcoxon符号秩检验(Bonferroni-corrected)和线性混合模型检验(α = 0.05)对数据进行分析。结果:技术对空隙率有显著影响(F(3,98) = 12.87, p < 0.001)。在所有三分之一的根管中,方法B的中位空隙率最低(6.00[7.00]),其次是方法A(8.00[8.75])、方法C(12.00[12.50])和方法D(12.00[19.00])。与技术无关,中位空腔率从冠状(6.00)增加到中间(11.00)和根尖(19.00)三分之一。技术间冠状面差异不显著(p = 0.437),但在中间(p = 0.014)和根尖(p < 0.001)三分之一处差异显著,其中B技术的根尖适应性最好。结论:压印法对嵌体适应有显著影响。使用口内扫描仪数字化的轻体橡胶印模可以获得最佳的整体和根尖配合,支持数字化工作流程,特别是那些使用数字化物理印模的工作流程。无论技术如何,向顶端的适应都在退化。
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
Dentistry Journal
Dentistry Journal Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
213
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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
小红书