{"title":"辅助几何装置对全弓种植印模测量准确性和扫描时间影响的体外评价。","authors":"Sema Ateşalp İleri, Emine Begüm Büyükerkmen","doi":"10.4047/jap.2025.17.4.197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This <i>in vitro</i> study aimed to evaluate the effect of clinically practical auxiliary geometric devices (AGD) on measurement trueness and scan time in full-arch implant-supported prostheses, focusing on different intraoral scanners (IOS) and implant angulations.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Four implants were planned in an edentulous maxillary arch and divided into two groups based on posterior implant angulation: Model A (Parallel) and Model B (30°). Each model was evaluated under three auxiliary geometric devices (AGD) application types (std, agd1, agd2), and scanned using three different intraoral scanners (IOSs) [3Shape Trios 3 (T), Medit i700 (M), and Cerec Primescan (PS)], resulting in nine groups per model (n = 10). Scanning times and faulty scans were recorded. A conventional impression (CON) was taken as a control and digitized with a desktop scanner. Trueness was analyzed using Geomagic Control X, with statistical significance set at <i>P</i> < .05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group B had higher RMS values than Group A (40.3 µm vs. 34.7 µm). T_std in Group A (51.4 µm) and T_std (53.1 µm) and Con (50.7 µm) in Group B exceeded the acceptable deviation limit. AGDs reduced deviations to acceptable levels in the Trios 3. The Primescan scanner had the shortest scanning times. AGD use, especially in T_agd2 and M_agd2, shortened scan times and eliminated erroneous scans.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of AGD has a significant impact on scanners' scanning trueness and time.</p>","PeriodicalId":51291,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics","volume":"17 4","pages":"197-209"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12411304/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"<i>In vitro</i> evaluation of the effect of auxiliary geometric device on measurement trueness and scanning time in full-arch implant impressions.\",\"authors\":\"Sema Ateşalp İleri, Emine Begüm Büyükerkmen\",\"doi\":\"10.4047/jap.2025.17.4.197\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This <i>in vitro</i> study aimed to evaluate the effect of clinically practical auxiliary geometric devices (AGD) on measurement trueness and scan time in full-arch implant-supported prostheses, focusing on different intraoral scanners (IOS) and implant angulations.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Four implants were planned in an edentulous maxillary arch and divided into two groups based on posterior implant angulation: Model A (Parallel) and Model B (30°). Each model was evaluated under three auxiliary geometric devices (AGD) application types (std, agd1, agd2), and scanned using three different intraoral scanners (IOSs) [3Shape Trios 3 (T), Medit i700 (M), and Cerec Primescan (PS)], resulting in nine groups per model (n = 10). Scanning times and faulty scans were recorded. A conventional impression (CON) was taken as a control and digitized with a desktop scanner. Trueness was analyzed using Geomagic Control X, with statistical significance set at <i>P</i> < .05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group B had higher RMS values than Group A (40.3 µm vs. 34.7 µm). T_std in Group A (51.4 µm) and T_std (53.1 µm) and Con (50.7 µm) in Group B exceeded the acceptable deviation limit. AGDs reduced deviations to acceptable levels in the Trios 3. The Primescan scanner had the shortest scanning times. AGD use, especially in T_agd2 and M_agd2, shortened scan times and eliminated erroneous scans.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of AGD has a significant impact on scanners' scanning trueness and time.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics\",\"volume\":\"17 4\",\"pages\":\"197-209\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12411304/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2025.17.4.197\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2025.17.4.197","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
In vitro evaluation of the effect of auxiliary geometric device on measurement trueness and scanning time in full-arch implant impressions.
Purpose: This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the effect of clinically practical auxiliary geometric devices (AGD) on measurement trueness and scan time in full-arch implant-supported prostheses, focusing on different intraoral scanners (IOS) and implant angulations.
Materials and methods: Four implants were planned in an edentulous maxillary arch and divided into two groups based on posterior implant angulation: Model A (Parallel) and Model B (30°). Each model was evaluated under three auxiliary geometric devices (AGD) application types (std, agd1, agd2), and scanned using three different intraoral scanners (IOSs) [3Shape Trios 3 (T), Medit i700 (M), and Cerec Primescan (PS)], resulting in nine groups per model (n = 10). Scanning times and faulty scans were recorded. A conventional impression (CON) was taken as a control and digitized with a desktop scanner. Trueness was analyzed using Geomagic Control X, with statistical significance set at P < .05.
Results: Group B had higher RMS values than Group A (40.3 µm vs. 34.7 µm). T_std in Group A (51.4 µm) and T_std (53.1 µm) and Con (50.7 µm) in Group B exceeded the acceptable deviation limit. AGDs reduced deviations to acceptable levels in the Trios 3. The Primescan scanner had the shortest scanning times. AGD use, especially in T_agd2 and M_agd2, shortened scan times and eliminated erroneous scans.
Conclusion: The use of AGD has a significant impact on scanners' scanning trueness and time.
期刊介绍:
This journal aims to convey scientific and clinical progress in the field of prosthodontics and its related areas to many dental communities concerned with esthetic and functional restorations, occlusion, implants, prostheses, and biomaterials related to prosthodontics.
This journal publishes
• Original research data of high scientific merit in the field of diagnosis, function, esthetics and stomatognathic physiology related to prosthodontic rehabilitation, physiology and mechanics of occlusion, mechanical and biologic aspects of prosthodontic materials including dental implants.
• Review articles by experts on controversies and new developments in prosthodontics.
• Case reports if they provide or document new fundamental knowledge.