扫描方案对全口数字种植体扫描准确性的影响:体外研究

IF 4.8 1区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Adam Hamilton, William Matthew Negreiros, Shruti Jain, Matthew Finkelman, German O. Gallucci
{"title":"扫描方案对全口数字种植体扫描准确性的影响:体外研究","authors":"Adam Hamilton,&nbsp;William Matthew Negreiros,&nbsp;Shruti Jain,&nbsp;Matthew Finkelman,&nbsp;German O. Gallucci","doi":"10.1111/clr.14259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This in-vitro study assessed the influence of two intraoral scanning (IOS) protocols on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of digital scans performed in edentulous arches.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Twenty-two abutment-level master casts of edentulous arches with at least four implants were scanned repeatedly five times, each with two different scanning protocols. Protocol A (IOS-A) consisted of scanning the edentulous arch before inserting the implant scan bodies, followed by their insertion and its subsequent digital acquisition. Protocol B (IOS-B) consisted of scanning the edentulous arch with the scan bodies inserted from the outset. A reference scan from each edentulous cast was obtained using a laboratory scanner. Trueness and precision were calculated using the spatial fit analysis, cross-arch distance, and virtual Sheffield test. Statistical analysis was performed using generalized estimating equations (GEEs). Statistical significance was set at <i>α</i> = .05.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>In the spatial fit test, the precision of average 3D distances was 45 μm (±23 μm) with protocol IOS-A and 25 μm (±10 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> &lt; .001), and the trueness of average 3D distances was 44 μm (±24 μm) with protocol IOS-A and 24 μm (±7 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> &lt; .001). Cross-arch distance precision was 59 μm (±53 μm) for IOS-A and 41 μm (±43 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> = .0035), and trueness was 64 μm (±47 μm) for IOS-A and 50 μm (±40 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> = .0021). Virtual Sheffield precision was 286 μm (±198 μm) for IOS-A and 146 μm (±92 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> &lt; .001), and trueness was 228 μm (±171 μm) for IOS-A and 139 μm (±92 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> &lt; .001).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The IOS-B protocol demonstrated significantly superior accuracy. Placement of scan bodies before scanning the edentulous arch is recommended to improve the accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scanning.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/clr.14259","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of scanning protocol on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant scans: An in vitro study\",\"authors\":\"Adam Hamilton,&nbsp;William Matthew Negreiros,&nbsp;Shruti Jain,&nbsp;Matthew Finkelman,&nbsp;German O. Gallucci\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/clr.14259\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>This in-vitro study assessed the influence of two intraoral scanning (IOS) protocols on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of digital scans performed in edentulous arches.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Twenty-two abutment-level master casts of edentulous arches with at least four implants were scanned repeatedly five times, each with two different scanning protocols. Protocol A (IOS-A) consisted of scanning the edentulous arch before inserting the implant scan bodies, followed by their insertion and its subsequent digital acquisition. Protocol B (IOS-B) consisted of scanning the edentulous arch with the scan bodies inserted from the outset. A reference scan from each edentulous cast was obtained using a laboratory scanner. Trueness and precision were calculated using the spatial fit analysis, cross-arch distance, and virtual Sheffield test. Statistical analysis was performed using generalized estimating equations (GEEs). Statistical significance was set at <i>α</i> = .05.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>In the spatial fit test, the precision of average 3D distances was 45 μm (±23 μm) with protocol IOS-A and 25 μm (±10 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> &lt; .001), and the trueness of average 3D distances was 44 μm (±24 μm) with protocol IOS-A and 24 μm (±7 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> &lt; .001). Cross-arch distance precision was 59 μm (±53 μm) for IOS-A and 41 μm (±43 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> = .0035), and trueness was 64 μm (±47 μm) for IOS-A and 50 μm (±40 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> = .0021). Virtual Sheffield precision was 286 μm (±198 μm) for IOS-A and 146 μm (±92 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> &lt; .001), and trueness was 228 μm (±171 μm) for IOS-A and 139 μm (±92 μm) for IOS-B (<i>p</i> &lt; .001).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The IOS-B protocol demonstrated significantly superior accuracy. Placement of scan bodies before scanning the edentulous arch is recommended to improve the accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scanning.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Oral Implants Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/clr.14259\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Oral Implants Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.14259\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.14259","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

摘要

这项体外研究评估了两种口内扫描(IOS)方案对无牙颌数字扫描准确性(真实度和精确度)的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Influence of scanning protocol on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant scans: An in vitro study

Influence of scanning protocol on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant scans: An in vitro study

Objective

This in-vitro study assessed the influence of two intraoral scanning (IOS) protocols on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of digital scans performed in edentulous arches.

Methods

Twenty-two abutment-level master casts of edentulous arches with at least four implants were scanned repeatedly five times, each with two different scanning protocols. Protocol A (IOS-A) consisted of scanning the edentulous arch before inserting the implant scan bodies, followed by their insertion and its subsequent digital acquisition. Protocol B (IOS-B) consisted of scanning the edentulous arch with the scan bodies inserted from the outset. A reference scan from each edentulous cast was obtained using a laboratory scanner. Trueness and precision were calculated using the spatial fit analysis, cross-arch distance, and virtual Sheffield test. Statistical analysis was performed using generalized estimating equations (GEEs). Statistical significance was set at α = .05.

Results

In the spatial fit test, the precision of average 3D distances was 45 μm (±23 μm) with protocol IOS-A and 25 μm (±10 μm) for IOS-B (p < .001), and the trueness of average 3D distances was 44 μm (±24 μm) with protocol IOS-A and 24 μm (±7 μm) for IOS-B (p < .001). Cross-arch distance precision was 59 μm (±53 μm) for IOS-A and 41 μm (±43 μm) for IOS-B (p = .0035), and trueness was 64 μm (±47 μm) for IOS-A and 50 μm (±40 μm) for IOS-B (p = .0021). Virtual Sheffield precision was 286 μm (±198 μm) for IOS-A and 146 μm (±92 μm) for IOS-B (p < .001), and trueness was 228 μm (±171 μm) for IOS-A and 139 μm (±92 μm) for IOS-B (p < .001).

Conclusions

The IOS-B protocol demonstrated significantly superior accuracy. Placement of scan bodies before scanning the edentulous arch is recommended to improve the accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scanning.

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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信