Ra'fat I. Farah BDS, MSc, Bandar Alresheedi BDS, MSc, Saad Alazmi BDS, Sanaa N. Al-Haj Ali BDS, MSc
{"title":"评估扫描体角度和几何附着物对全弓数字种植印模精度的影响:两种口内扫描仪的比较。","authors":"Ra'fat I. Farah BDS, MSc, Bandar Alresheedi BDS, MSc, Saad Alazmi BDS, Sanaa N. Al-Haj Ali BDS, MSc","doi":"10.1111/jopr.13807","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>To investigate the effects of scan body (SB) angulation and geometric attachments (GAs) on the deviations of complete-arch digital implant impressions obtained using intraoral scanners (IOSs), in relation to the gold-standard desktop scanner.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Material and methods</h3>\n \n <p>Two IOSs (iTero and Omnicam), two SB angulations (0 degrees and 30 degrees), and GAs for the SBs were investigated. SBs were attached to an edentulous maxillary cast with the following implant analogs: parallel 0-degree at positions #13, #23, and #26, and 30-degree posteriorly tilted at position #16. The cast was digitized using a reference desktop scanner, followed by ten consecutive digital scans using each IOS (five scans with GAs and five without GAs, <i>n</i> = 20). Meshes obtained from the IOS scans were superimposed on the master reference mesh. Linear distance and 3D surface deviations from the reference mesh were calculated. A three-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was employed to assess the effects of angulation, IOS type, and GAs on the combined dependent variables (<i>α</i> = 0.05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>No significant three-way interaction was observed between IOS type, SB angulation, and GAs for combined deviations from the reference scan (<i>p</i> = 0.56). Simple main effect analysis revealed that iTero exhibited significantly lower mean 3D surface and linear deviations than Omnicam (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Additionally, the use of GAs significantly reduced deviations (<i>p</i> < 0.001), with mean deviation reductions for both scanners ranging from 26–33 micrometers (µm) for 3D deviations and 15–21 µm for linear distance deviations. No differences were found between angled and parallel SBs regarding 3D surface and linear distance deviations (<i>p</i> ≥ 0.05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>ITero demonstrated significantly smaller deviations, and the use of GAs led to significantly reduced distance and 3D surface deviations. SB angulations did not impact scan deviations.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":49152,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","volume":"34 2","pages":"174-181"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the impact of scan body angulation and geometric attachments on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impressions: A comparison of two intraoral scanners\",\"authors\":\"Ra'fat I. Farah BDS, MSc, Bandar Alresheedi BDS, MSc, Saad Alazmi BDS, Sanaa N. Al-Haj Ali BDS, MSc\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jopr.13807\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>To investigate the effects of scan body (SB) angulation and geometric attachments (GAs) on the deviations of complete-arch digital implant impressions obtained using intraoral scanners (IOSs), in relation to the gold-standard desktop scanner.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Material and methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Two IOSs (iTero and Omnicam), two SB angulations (0 degrees and 30 degrees), and GAs for the SBs were investigated. SBs were attached to an edentulous maxillary cast with the following implant analogs: parallel 0-degree at positions #13, #23, and #26, and 30-degree posteriorly tilted at position #16. The cast was digitized using a reference desktop scanner, followed by ten consecutive digital scans using each IOS (five scans with GAs and five without GAs, <i>n</i> = 20). Meshes obtained from the IOS scans were superimposed on the master reference mesh. Linear distance and 3D surface deviations from the reference mesh were calculated. A three-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was employed to assess the effects of angulation, IOS type, and GAs on the combined dependent variables (<i>α</i> = 0.05).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>No significant three-way interaction was observed between IOS type, SB angulation, and GAs for combined deviations from the reference scan (<i>p</i> = 0.56). Simple main effect analysis revealed that iTero exhibited significantly lower mean 3D surface and linear deviations than Omnicam (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Additionally, the use of GAs significantly reduced deviations (<i>p</i> < 0.001), with mean deviation reductions for both scanners ranging from 26–33 micrometers (µm) for 3D deviations and 15–21 µm for linear distance deviations. No differences were found between angled and parallel SBs regarding 3D surface and linear distance deviations (<i>p</i> ≥ 0.05).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>ITero demonstrated significantly smaller deviations, and the use of GAs led to significantly reduced distance and 3D surface deviations. SB angulations did not impact scan deviations.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"34 2\",\"pages\":\"174-181\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jopr.13807\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jopr.13807","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluating the impact of scan body angulation and geometric attachments on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impressions: A comparison of two intraoral scanners
Purpose
To investigate the effects of scan body (SB) angulation and geometric attachments (GAs) on the deviations of complete-arch digital implant impressions obtained using intraoral scanners (IOSs), in relation to the gold-standard desktop scanner.
Material and methods
Two IOSs (iTero and Omnicam), two SB angulations (0 degrees and 30 degrees), and GAs for the SBs were investigated. SBs were attached to an edentulous maxillary cast with the following implant analogs: parallel 0-degree at positions #13, #23, and #26, and 30-degree posteriorly tilted at position #16. The cast was digitized using a reference desktop scanner, followed by ten consecutive digital scans using each IOS (five scans with GAs and five without GAs, n = 20). Meshes obtained from the IOS scans were superimposed on the master reference mesh. Linear distance and 3D surface deviations from the reference mesh were calculated. A three-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was employed to assess the effects of angulation, IOS type, and GAs on the combined dependent variables (α = 0.05).
Results
No significant three-way interaction was observed between IOS type, SB angulation, and GAs for combined deviations from the reference scan (p = 0.56). Simple main effect analysis revealed that iTero exhibited significantly lower mean 3D surface and linear deviations than Omnicam (p < 0.05). Additionally, the use of GAs significantly reduced deviations (p < 0.001), with mean deviation reductions for both scanners ranging from 26–33 micrometers (µm) for 3D deviations and 15–21 µm for linear distance deviations. No differences were found between angled and parallel SBs regarding 3D surface and linear distance deviations (p ≥ 0.05).
Conclusions
ITero demonstrated significantly smaller deviations, and the use of GAs led to significantly reduced distance and 3D surface deviations. SB angulations did not impact scan deviations.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Prosthodontics promotes the advanced study and practice of prosthodontics, implant, esthetic, and reconstructive dentistry. It is the official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, the American Dental Association-recognized voice of the Specialty of Prosthodontics. The journal publishes evidence-based original scientific articles presenting information that is relevant and useful to prosthodontists. Additionally, it publishes reports of innovative techniques, new instructional methodologies, and instructive clinical reports with an interdisciplinary flair. The journal is particularly focused on promoting the study and use of cutting-edge technology and positioning prosthodontists as the early-adopters of new technology in the dental community.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
