Ali Mahmoud Hashemi, Mahya Hasanzadeh, Leila Payaminia, Marzieh Alikhasi
{"title":"重复使用不同类型的扫描体对种植体位置转移准确性的影响。","authors":"Ali Mahmoud Hashemi, Mahya Hasanzadeh, Leila Payaminia, Marzieh Alikhasi","doi":"10.30476/dentjods.2022.96149.1922","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Statement of the problem: </strong>Some components of implant treatment are reusable. Therefore, possible changes during fixation, removal, and sterilization process should be tested. Many studies have examined the reuse of implant parts, but the impact of repeated use of scan bodies on the accuracy of implant position has not been well investigated.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this <i>in vitro</i> study was to compare the effect of repeated use of two different types of scan bodies on the accuracy of implant position.</p><p><strong>Materials and method: </strong>In this <i>in vitro</i> experimental study, two acrylic resin maxillary models, each with two implant analogues inserted at the site of missing first and second molars were used. Two types of scan bodies including titanium and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) were used for digital impression. Then they were ten times removed and autoclaved for sterilization. The first scan was considered as a reference to be compared with the other next nine scans. Values of linear distance between two scan bodies, diameter changes of each scan body, and three-dimensional linear displacement (ΔR) were measured. These values were compared between the two types of scan bodies using <i>t</i>-test (α=.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was significant difference between titanium and PEEK scan bodies regarding inter-implant distance variation (<i>p</i>=.006) and diameter change (<i>p</i>< .001) in repeated use. However, for the ΔR, there was no significant difference between them (<i>p</i>= 0.759).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results demonstrated that type of scan body could affect the accuracy of implant position transfer after repeated use. PEEK scan body performed better after 9 cycles of reuse in comparison with titanium scan body.</p>","PeriodicalId":73702,"journal":{"name":"Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran)","volume":"24 4","pages":"410-416"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10749433/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of Repeated Use of Different Types of Scan Bodies on Transfer Accuracy of Implant Position.\",\"authors\":\"Ali Mahmoud Hashemi, Mahya Hasanzadeh, Leila Payaminia, Marzieh Alikhasi\",\"doi\":\"10.30476/dentjods.2022.96149.1922\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Statement of the problem: </strong>Some components of implant treatment are reusable. Therefore, possible changes during fixation, removal, and sterilization process should be tested. Many studies have examined the reuse of implant parts, but the impact of repeated use of scan bodies on the accuracy of implant position has not been well investigated.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this <i>in vitro</i> study was to compare the effect of repeated use of two different types of scan bodies on the accuracy of implant position.</p><p><strong>Materials and method: </strong>In this <i>in vitro</i> experimental study, two acrylic resin maxillary models, each with two implant analogues inserted at the site of missing first and second molars were used. Two types of scan bodies including titanium and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) were used for digital impression. Then they were ten times removed and autoclaved for sterilization. The first scan was considered as a reference to be compared with the other next nine scans. Values of linear distance between two scan bodies, diameter changes of each scan body, and three-dimensional linear displacement (ΔR) were measured. These values were compared between the two types of scan bodies using <i>t</i>-test (α=.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was significant difference between titanium and PEEK scan bodies regarding inter-implant distance variation (<i>p</i>=.006) and diameter change (<i>p</i>< .001) in repeated use. However, for the ΔR, there was no significant difference between them (<i>p</i>= 0.759).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results demonstrated that type of scan body could affect the accuracy of implant position transfer after repeated use. PEEK scan body performed better after 9 cycles of reuse in comparison with titanium scan body.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73702,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran)\",\"volume\":\"24 4\",\"pages\":\"410-416\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10749433/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30476/dentjods.2022.96149.1922\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30476/dentjods.2022.96149.1922","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
问题陈述:植入治疗的某些组件可重复使用。因此,应检测在固定、取出和消毒过程中可能发生的变化。目的:本体外研究的目的是比较重复使用两种不同类型的扫描体对种植体位置准确性的影响:在这项体外实验研究中,使用了两个丙烯酸树脂上颌模型,每个模型的第一和第二磨牙缺失部位都植入了两个种植体模拟体。使用钛和聚醚醚酮(PEEK)两种扫描体进行数字化印模。然后将它们取出十次并高压灭菌。第一张扫描图作为参考,与接下来的九张扫描图进行比较。测量两个扫描体之间的线性距离值、每个扫描体的直径变化和三维线性位移(ΔR)。使用 t 检验(α=.05)比较两种扫描体之间的这些值:结果:在重复使用中,钛和 PEEK 扫描体在种植体间距变化(p=.006)和直径变化(p< .001)方面存在明显差异。然而,在ΔR方面,两者之间没有显著差异(p= 0.759):结果表明,扫描体的类型会影响重复使用后种植体位置转移的准确性。与钛扫描体相比,PEEK扫描体在重复使用9次后表现更好。
Effect of Repeated Use of Different Types of Scan Bodies on Transfer Accuracy of Implant Position.
Statement of the problem: Some components of implant treatment are reusable. Therefore, possible changes during fixation, removal, and sterilization process should be tested. Many studies have examined the reuse of implant parts, but the impact of repeated use of scan bodies on the accuracy of implant position has not been well investigated.
Purpose: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the effect of repeated use of two different types of scan bodies on the accuracy of implant position.
Materials and method: In this in vitro experimental study, two acrylic resin maxillary models, each with two implant analogues inserted at the site of missing first and second molars were used. Two types of scan bodies including titanium and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) were used for digital impression. Then they were ten times removed and autoclaved for sterilization. The first scan was considered as a reference to be compared with the other next nine scans. Values of linear distance between two scan bodies, diameter changes of each scan body, and three-dimensional linear displacement (ΔR) were measured. These values were compared between the two types of scan bodies using t-test (α=.05).
Results: There was significant difference between titanium and PEEK scan bodies regarding inter-implant distance variation (p=.006) and diameter change (p< .001) in repeated use. However, for the ΔR, there was no significant difference between them (p= 0.759).
Conclusion: The results demonstrated that type of scan body could affect the accuracy of implant position transfer after repeated use. PEEK scan body performed better after 9 cycles of reuse in comparison with titanium scan body.