两种不同的口腔内扫描仪在龋齿清除中测定与龋齿相关体积损失的比较

IF 0.2 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Merve Şeker, Elif Alkan, Dilek Tağtekin, Bora Korkut, Funda Yanıkoğlu
{"title":"两种不同的口腔内扫描仪在龋齿清除中测定与龋齿相关体积损失的比较","authors":"Merve Şeker, Elif Alkan, Dilek Tağtekin, Bora Korkut, Funda Yanıkoğlu","doi":"10.14693/jdi.v30i2.1430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The study aimed to compare cavity volume data obtained with two different intraoral scanners. Methods: One hundred extracted molar teeth were divided into groups according to ICDAS-II classification, and scanned with Cerec Omnicam (Dentsply Sirona) and iTero Element Flex (Align Technology). The caries-infected tissues were removed regarding either minimally invasive or conventional cavity principles. Samples were scanned again and volumetric data were assessed by Meshmixer 3.5 (Autodesk) 3D modeling software. Statistical evaluations were performed with Mann Whitney U test and Spearman’s Correlation test. The significance level was α=0.05. Results: Although there was a significant difference between obtained initial volume readings of two scanners for 3M and 3C groups (p < 0.05), no significant difference was observed among other groups (p ≥ 0.05). Regarding the comparison of final volume readings of two scanners, a significant difference was found for 5M group (p = 0.036), whereas no significant difference was observed for other groups (p ≥ 0.05). Percentage of volume loss between two scanners was statistically similar (p ≥ 0.05). Conclusion: Data obtained with Cerec Omnicam and iTero Element Flex were compatible with volumetric assessments. Both intraoral scanners may be considered effective for calculating caries-related cavity volumes. Minimally invasive cavity principles may provide less volume loss compared to conventional cavity principles.","PeriodicalId":53873,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dentistry Indonesia","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Two Different Intraoral Scanners for Determination of Caries Related Volume Loss in Caries Removal\",\"authors\":\"Merve Şeker, Elif Alkan, Dilek Tağtekin, Bora Korkut, Funda Yanıkoğlu\",\"doi\":\"10.14693/jdi.v30i2.1430\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: The study aimed to compare cavity volume data obtained with two different intraoral scanners. Methods: One hundred extracted molar teeth were divided into groups according to ICDAS-II classification, and scanned with Cerec Omnicam (Dentsply Sirona) and iTero Element Flex (Align Technology). The caries-infected tissues were removed regarding either minimally invasive or conventional cavity principles. Samples were scanned again and volumetric data were assessed by Meshmixer 3.5 (Autodesk) 3D modeling software. Statistical evaluations were performed with Mann Whitney U test and Spearman’s Correlation test. The significance level was α=0.05. Results: Although there was a significant difference between obtained initial volume readings of two scanners for 3M and 3C groups (p < 0.05), no significant difference was observed among other groups (p ≥ 0.05). Regarding the comparison of final volume readings of two scanners, a significant difference was found for 5M group (p = 0.036), whereas no significant difference was observed for other groups (p ≥ 0.05). Percentage of volume loss between two scanners was statistically similar (p ≥ 0.05). Conclusion: Data obtained with Cerec Omnicam and iTero Element Flex were compatible with volumetric assessments. Both intraoral scanners may be considered effective for calculating caries-related cavity volumes. Minimally invasive cavity principles may provide less volume loss compared to conventional cavity principles.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53873,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Dentistry Indonesia\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Dentistry Indonesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14693/jdi.v30i2.1430\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dentistry Indonesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14693/jdi.v30i2.1430","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较两种不同的口腔内扫描仪所获得的口腔体积数据。方法:100颗拔除的磨牙按照icdasi分类进行分组,分别用Cerec Omnicam (Dentsply Sirona)和iTero Element Flex (Align Technology)进行扫描。采用微创或常规的方法切除受龋感染的组织。再次扫描样品,并使用Meshmixer 3.5 (Autodesk) 3D建模软件评估体积数据。统计学评价采用Mann Whitney U检验和Spearman相关检验。显著性水平为α=0.05。结果:虽然两种扫描仪在3M组和3C组获得的初始体积读数之间存在显著差异(p <0.05),其他组间差异无统计学意义(p≥0.05)。两台扫描仪的最终体积读数比较,5M组差异有统计学意义(p = 0.036),其他组差异无统计学意义(p≥0.05)。两种扫描仪的体积损失百分比在统计学上相似(p≥0.05)。结论:Cerec Omnicam和iTero Element Flex获得的数据与容量评估一致。这两种口腔内扫描仪都可以被认为是有效的计算龋齿相关的腔体积。与传统的腔原理相比,微创腔原理可以提供更少的体积损失。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Two Different Intraoral Scanners for Determination of Caries Related Volume Loss in Caries Removal
Objective: The study aimed to compare cavity volume data obtained with two different intraoral scanners. Methods: One hundred extracted molar teeth were divided into groups according to ICDAS-II classification, and scanned with Cerec Omnicam (Dentsply Sirona) and iTero Element Flex (Align Technology). The caries-infected tissues were removed regarding either minimally invasive or conventional cavity principles. Samples were scanned again and volumetric data were assessed by Meshmixer 3.5 (Autodesk) 3D modeling software. Statistical evaluations were performed with Mann Whitney U test and Spearman’s Correlation test. The significance level was α=0.05. Results: Although there was a significant difference between obtained initial volume readings of two scanners for 3M and 3C groups (p < 0.05), no significant difference was observed among other groups (p ≥ 0.05). Regarding the comparison of final volume readings of two scanners, a significant difference was found for 5M group (p = 0.036), whereas no significant difference was observed for other groups (p ≥ 0.05). Percentage of volume loss between two scanners was statistically similar (p ≥ 0.05). Conclusion: Data obtained with Cerec Omnicam and iTero Element Flex were compatible with volumetric assessments. Both intraoral scanners may be considered effective for calculating caries-related cavity volumes. Minimally invasive cavity principles may provide less volume loss compared to conventional cavity principles.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Dentistry Indonesia
Journal of Dentistry Indonesia DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信