1
|
Chen Z, Wang Y, Sun Z, Zhao J, Lin N, Zheng Y. Clinical evaluation of closed tray impression and intraoral scanning techniques in single posterior tissue-level implant-supported crowns: A self-controlled case study. J Prosthet Dent 2024:S0022-3913(24)00379-2. [PMID: 38955602 DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.05.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2023] [Revised: 05/23/2024] [Accepted: 05/23/2024] [Indexed: 07/04/2024]
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM Different techniques have been used to record the locations of dental implants, yet research examining the clinical outcomes of posterior implant-supported prostheses generated by different techniques, particularly concerning their fit, is lacking. PURPOSE The purpose of this self-controlled study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of closed tray impression making and intraoral scanning for single posterior implant-supported restorations. MATERIAL AND METHODS Eighty-two participants with a single missing posterior tooth were included. The restorations were delivered a minimum of 3 months after tissue-level implant placement. Each participant was provided with 2 screw-retained monolithic zirconia crowns, produced using 3-dimensional (3D) gel deposition from both closed tray impression making (control group) and intraoral scanning using an iTero scanner (experimental group). The recording operating time, the patient comfort assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS), and the fit of the crowns were recorded during clinical evaluation. The paired t test and Mann-Whitney U test were conducted to statistically analyze the differences between the 2 techniques (α=.05). RESULTS Seventy-six participants completed the study with a dropout rate of 7.3%. The mean ±standard deviation recording operating time of the control and experimental groups was 683 ±164 and 777 ±407 s, respectively (P<.05). The mean ±standard deviation VAS score of the control and experimental groups was 2.6 ±1.6 and 1.3 ±1.0, respectively (P<.05). The crowns in both groups showed excellent marginal fit (P>.05), but the occlusal contacts of crowns in the experimental group were significantly better (P<.05), while the interproximal contacts were significantly worse (P<.05) compared with those in the control group. In the control group, 1 crown was rated as Delta for occlusal contact and deemed clinically unacceptable. CONCLUSIONS In single posterior tissue-level implant-supported restorations, the clinical outcomes of most of the screw-retained monolithic zirconia crowns generated from closed tray impression making and intraoral scanning with the iTero system and fabricated by 3D gel deposition were acceptable. Compared with the closed tray impression technique, intraoral scanning resulted in better patient comfort and occlusal contacts but worse interproximal contacts. Efficiency was lower with intraoral scanning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhi Chen
- Graduate student, Graduate Prosthodontics, School/Hospital of Stomatology, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Ningbo Dental Hospital/Ningbo Oral Health Research Institute, Ningbo, PR China
| | - Yong Wang
- Attending, School/Hospital of Stomatology, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Department of Stomatology, Shangcheng District Jiubao Community Health Center of Hangzhou City, Hangzhou, PR China
| | - Zhe Sun
- Resident, Department of General Dentistry, School/Hospital of Stomatology, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, PR China
| | - Jing Zhao
- Attending, Department of General Dentistry, Hospital of Stomatology, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, PR China
| | - Nengjie Lin
- Resident, Department of General Dentistry, School/Hospital of Stomatology, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, PR China
| | - Yuanna Zheng
- Professor, School/Hospital of Stomatology, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Ningbo Dental Hospital/Ningbo Oral Health Research Institute, Ningbo, PR China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sicilia E, Lagreca G, Papaspyridakos P, Finkelman M, Cobo J, Att W, Revilla-León M. Effect of supramucosal height of a scan body and implant angulation on the accuracy of intraoral scanning: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2024; 131:1126-1134. [PMID: 36828728 DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.01.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2022] [Revised: 01/15/2023] [Accepted: 01/18/2023] [Indexed: 02/25/2023]
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM Intraoral scanners (IOSs) provide a digital alternative to conventional implant impression techniques. However, the effect of the supramucosal height of the scan body and implant angulation on the accuracy of IOSs remains unclear. PURPOSE The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure the impact of the supramucosal height of the scan body and implant angulation on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of intraoral digital implant scans in partially edentulous models. MATERIAL AND METHODS Two maxillary partially edentulous casts with 4 implant analogs were fabricated, 1 with 4 parallel implants (P-groups) and 1 with 2 implants distally inclined 18 degrees (A-groups). An implant scan body was positioned on each implant analog (CARES RC Mono Scanbody). For each cast, 3 subgroups were determined based on the soft tissue moulage fabricated for each reference cast exposing 3 mm (P-3 and A-3 subgroups), 5 mm (P-5 and A-5 subgroups), and 7 mm (P-7 and A-7 subgroups) of the implant scan bodies. The 2 reference casts were registered by using a coordinate measurement machine and desktop scanner (7 Series Dental Wings) and then scanned using an IOS (TRIOS 4) (n=15). Linear and angular discrepancy values and root mean square (RMS) error values between the implant scan bodies measured on the reference and experimental scans were computed with an inspection software program (Geomagic). Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction were applied for planned comparisons (α=.05/9 ≈ .006). RESULTS For linear discrepancies, statistically significant differences were found between groups P-3 and A-3 (P=.004) and between P-7 and A-7 (P=.005). For angular discrepancies, statistically significant differences were found between groups A-3 and A-5 (P=.002) and between P-7 and A-7 (P=.003). The RMS error analysis found no statistically significant differences among the groups. CONCLUSIONS Implant angulation of 18 degrees did not significantly affect the accuracy of the intraoral scans in terms of 6 of the 9 planned comparisons, although the angled groups had lower mean values. Also, the supramucosal height of the scan body did not significantly affect the accuracy of the intraoral scans in terms of 17 of the 18 planned comparisons. Results may vary with different implant scan body designs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elena Sicilia
- PhD Candidate, Department of Prosthodontics and Occlusion, School of Dentistry, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain.
| | - Gabriela Lagreca
- Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Mass
| | - Panos Papaspyridakos
- Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Mass
| | - Matthew Finkelman
- Associate Professor, Department of Public Health and Community Service, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Mass
| | - Juan Cobo
- Director of Orthodontics, Department of Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialties, Area of Orthodontics, Medical and Dental School, Instituto Asturiano de Odontologia, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain
| | - Wael Att
- Department Chair, Department of Prosthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Mass
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Marshaha NJ, Azhari AA, Assery MK, Ahmed WM. Evaluation of the trueness and precision of conventional impressions versus digital scans for the all-on-four treatment in the maxillary arch: An in vitro study. J Prosthodont 2024; 33:171-179. [PMID: 36811911 DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13666] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2022] [Revised: 01/07/2023] [Accepted: 02/05/2023] [Indexed: 02/24/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare the accuracy of digitizing conventional impressions to intraoral surface scans for all-on-four treatment in the maxillary arch. MATERIALS AND METHODS An edentulous maxillary arch model with four implants placed in an all-on-four design was fabricated. Intraoral surface scans (n = 10) were obtained using an intraoral scanner after scan body insertion. For conventional polyvinylsiloxane impressions of the model, implant copings were inserted into the implant fixation for implant level, opened tray impressions (n = 10). The model and conventional impressions were digitized to obtain digital files. A reference file was created using a laboratory-scanned conventional standard tessellation language (STL) file with analog to scan the body using exocad software. STL datasets from the two digital and conventional impression groups were superimposed with reference files to assess the 3D deviations. Two-way ANOVA and paired-samples t-test was performed to assess the difference in trueness and examine the effects of impression technique and implant angulation on the deviation amount. RESULTS No significant differences were found between the conventional impression and intraoral surface scan groups F(1, 76) = 2.705, p = 0.104. No significant differences were found between conventional straight and digital straight implants and between conventional and digital tilted implants F(1, 76) = .041, p = 0.841. No significant differences were found between conventional straight and conventional tilted implants p = 0.07 and between digital straight and digital tilted implants p = 0.08. CONCLUSION Digital scans were more accurate than conventional impressions. The digital straight implants were more accurate than the conventional straight implants, and the digital tilted implants were more accurate than the conventional tilted implants, with higher accuracy for digital straight implants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nour Jamal Marshaha
- Graduate Prosthodontics, Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Riyadh Elm University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Amr Ahmed Azhari
- Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
| | - Mansour K Assery
- Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Riyadh Elm University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Walaa Magdy Ahmed
- Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Vavrickova L, Kapitan M, Schmidt J. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of digital and conventional impression methods for fixed dentures. Technol Health Care 2024; 32:885-896. [PMID: 37661898 DOI: 10.3233/thc-230277] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Digital impression technique or computer-aided impression (CAI) has been recently concluded as a clinically acceptable alternative to conventional impression method (CIM) in the fabrication of crowns, short fixed partial dentures (FPDs), and implant-supported crowns. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to investigate the patients' opinion and subjective perception of two different ways of impression - digital and conventional. METHODS A total of 45 patients were treated with CAI and CIM for the fabrication of tooth or implant-supported crowns. They fulfilled a questionnaire including 11 questions regarding the treatment time, gag reflex, discomfort related to manipulation, and other aspects of treatment. RESULTS CAI was considered the preferential method for future treatment in 53% of patients, whereas 28.9% of the respondents preferred CIM. The preference for the impression method was influenced by the total time spent with the procedure, discomfort during manipulation with the tray or scanning head, size of the tray or scanning head, maximal opening discomfort, and (the tendency towards) gag reflex. CONCLUSION CAI was considered a more comfortable and preferential method. Discomfort or difficulties during CAI negatively affected the patients' attitude to CAI, whereas the difficulties associated with CIM did not have any influence on the preferred method.
Collapse
|
5
|
Tan S, Tan MY, Wong KM, Maria R, Tan KBC. Comparison of 3D positional accuracy of implant analogs in printed resin models versus conventional stone casts: Effect of implant angulation. J Prosthodont 2024; 33:46-53. [PMID: 36639956 DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13647] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2022] [Accepted: 01/05/2023] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To study the effect of implant angulation on 3D linear and absolute angular distortions of implant analogs in printed resin models and conventional stone casts. MATERIALS AND METHODS Three sectional master models with two implants with total inter-implant angulations of 0°, 10°, and 20° were fabricated. For each master model, five conventional stone casts (CS) and printed resin models (PM) were fabricated (n = 5). Test models were made with nonsplinted impression copings and open tray polyether impressions for the CS groups and scan bodies scanned using an intraoral scanner for the PM groups. The physical positions of the implants and implant analogs were measured with a coordinate measuring machine. 3D linear distortion (ΔR) and absolute angular distortion (Absdθ) defined the 3D positional accuracy of the analogs in the test models. Univariate ANOVA was used to analyze data followed by post hoc tests (Tukey HSD, α = 0.05). RESULTS Mean ΔR was significantly greater for PM10 (73.5 ± 8.9 µm) and PM20 (65.5 ± 33.3 µm) compared to CS0 (16.8 ± 14.1 µm), CS10 (22.2 ± 13.0 µm), CS20 (15.6 ± 19.9 µm), and PM0 (23.9 ± 16.1 µm). For Absdθ, there were no significant differences between test groups. CONCLUSIONS With conventional stone casts, implant angulation had no significant effect on 3D linear and absolute angular distortions. Amongst printed resin models test groups, angulated implants had significantly greater ΔR. Amongst angulated implants test groups, printed resin models had significantly greater ΔR than conventional stone casts. Compared to the master model, all test groups, regardless of inter-implant angulation, produced greater inter-analog distances.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shaun Tan
- Department of Restorative Dentistry, National Dental Centre of Singapore, Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| | - Ming Yi Tan
- Faculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| | - Keng Mun Wong
- Faculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| | - Rahmat Maria
- Department of Restorative Dentistry, National Dental Centre of Singapore, Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| | - Keson Beng Choon Tan
- Faculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Ma Y, Guo YQ, Jiang L, Yu H. Influence of intraoral conditions on the accuracy of digital and conventional implant impression techniques for two-implant-supported fixed dental prostheses. J Prosthodont Res 2023; 67:633-640. [PMID: 36804246 DOI: 10.2186/jpr.jpr_d_22_00242] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/19/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare the trueness and precision of different impression techniques for two-implant-supported fixed dental prostheses between extraoral and intraoral conditions at different locations. METHODS Six volunteers participated in this study. A resin block with two parallel analogs was fabricated as an implant site simulator (ISS). The ISS was bonded to a molded ethylene vinyl acetate sheet to create a reference model. For each participant, four reference models were prepared based on the locations of the ISSs: maxillary posterior/anterior region (MaxP/MaxA) and mandibular posterior/anterior region (ManP/ManA). Five impressions were taken extraorally using the open-tray (conventional implant impression technique, CIT) and intraoral scanning (digital implant impression technique, DIT) techniques. The reference models were positioned in the participants' mouths, and impressions were obtained intraorally using the CIT and DIT. The interanalog distance (d) and angulation (θ) were measured to calculate trueness (Δd, Δθ) and precision (dP, θP). Two-way ANOVA and t tests were performed (α=0.05). RESULTS For the DIT, under intraoral conditions, the Δd and Δθ in MaxP and Δθ in ManP were significantly higher than those under extraoral conditions. For the CIT, under intraoral conditions, the Δd and Δθ in ManA and ManP and Δθ in MaxP were significantly lower than those under extraoral conditions. No significant differences in the dP and θP of either DIT or CIT were observed between the two conditions. CONCLUSIONS Intraoral conditions affected the trueness of DIT and CIT in different regions but had no influence on precision.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yun Ma
- Fujian Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases & Fujian Provincial Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterial & Stomatological Key Laboratory of Fujian College and University, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China
| | - Yong-Qing Guo
- Department of Prosthodontics & Research Center of Dental Esthetics and Biomechanics, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China
| | - Lei Jiang
- Fujian Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases & Fujian Provincial Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterial & Stomatological Key Laboratory of Fujian College and University, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China
- Department of Prosthodontics & Research Center of Dental Esthetics and Biomechanics, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China
| | - Hao Yu
- Fujian Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases & Fujian Provincial Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterial & Stomatological Key Laboratory of Fujian College and University, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China
- Department of Prosthodontics & Research Center of Dental Esthetics and Biomechanics, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China
- Department of Applied Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Yan Y, Lin X, Yue X, Geng W. Accuracy of 2 direct digital scanning techniques-intraoral scanning and stereophotogrammetry-for complete arch implant-supported fixed prostheses: A prospective study. J Prosthet Dent 2023; 130:564-572. [PMID: 35667889 DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.03.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2021] [Revised: 03/01/2022] [Accepted: 03/02/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM Conventional impression techniques for complete arch implant-supported prostheses are technique-sensitive. Stereophotogrammetry (SPG) and intraoral scanning (IOS) may offer an alternative to conventional impression making. PURPOSE The purpose of this prospective study was to compare the accuracy of IOS and SPG for complete arch implant scans and to evaluate the passive fit of frameworks fabricated with SPG. MATERIAL AND METHODS Laboratory scanning of gypsum casts, SPG, and IOS were performed for all participants. The data regarding the abutment platform were superimposed to calculate the 3D deviation of SPG and IOS compared with that of laboratory scanning as an evaluation of accuracy. The effect of implant position and number on accuracy was analyzed. The more accurate technique between SPG and IOS was used to fabricate the titanium frameworks, as was laboratory scanning. The passive fit of the frameworks was assessed by clinical examination, the Sheffield test, and panoramic radiography. RESULTS Seventeen participants (21 arches, 120 implants) were included. The accuracy of SPG ranged from 2.70 μm to 92.80 μm, with a median (Q1, Q3) of 17.00 (11.68, 22.50) μm, which was significantly more accurate than that of IOS, ranging from 21.30 μm to 815.60 μm, with a median (Q1, Q3) of 48.95 (34.78, 75.88) μm. No significant correlation was found between position or number of implants and 3D deviation in the SPG group. A weak positive correlation was found between implant number and 3D deviation in the IOS group. SPG and laboratory scanning were used to fabricate titanium frameworks. The passive fit between the frameworks and abutment platforms was confirmed. CONCLUSIONS SPG, which was not affected by position or number of implants, was more accurate than IOS and comparable with laboratory scanning. The frameworks fabricated based on SPG and laboratory scanning were comparable in their passive fit. The SPG technique may be an alternative to laboratory scanning for complete arch implant scans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuwei Yan
- Graduate student, Department of Dental Implant Center, Beijing Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing, PR China
| | - Xiao Lin
- Attending physician, Department of Dental Implant Center, Beijing Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing, PR China
| | - Xinxin Yue
- Attending physician, Department of Dental Implant Center, Beijing Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing, PR China
| | - Wei Geng
- Professor, Department of Dental Implant Center, Beijing Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing, PR China.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Zingari F, Meglioli M, Gallo F, Macaluso GM, Tagliaferri S, Toffoli A, Ghezzi B, Lumetti S. Predictability of intraoral scanner error for full-arch implant-supported rehabilitation. Clin Oral Investig 2023:10.1007/s00784-023-05011-4. [PMID: 37041271 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-05011-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2022] [Accepted: 03/28/2023] [Indexed: 04/13/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The present study aimed to analyze the behaviors of three intraoral scanners (IOSs): evaluating the interdistance and axial inclination discrepancies in full-arch scans, predictable errors were searched. MATERIALS AND METHODS Six edentulous sample models with variable numbers of dental implants were used; reference data were obtained with a coordinate-measuring machine (CMM). Each IOS (i.e., Primescan, CS3600, and Trios3) performed 10 scans per model (180 total scans). The origin of each scan body was used as a reference point to measure interdistance lengths and axial inclinations. Precision and trueness of interdistance measurements and axial inclinations were evaluated to address error predictability. Bland-Altman analysis, followed by linear regression analysis and Friedman's test (plus Dunn's post hoc correction), was performed to evaluate the precision and trueness. RESULTS Regarding interdistance, Primescan showed the best precision (mean ± SD: 0.047 ± 0.020 mm), while Trios3 underestimated the reference value more than the others (p < 0.001) and had the worst performance (mean ± SD: -0.079 ± 0.048 mm). Concerning the inclination angle, Primescan and Trios3 tended to overestimate angle values, while CS3600 underestimated them. Primescan had fewer inclination angle outliers, but it tended to add 0.4-0.6° to the measurements. CONCLUSIONS IOSs showed predictable errors: they tended to overestimate or underestimate linear measurements and axial inclinations of scan bodies, one added 0.4-0.6° to the angle inclination values. In particular, they showed heteroscedasticity, a behavior probably related to the software or the device itself. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE IOSs showed predictable errors that could affect clinical success. When performing a scan or choosing a scanner, clinicians should clearly know their behaviors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Zingari
- Center of Dental Medicine, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Via Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy
- Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Galeazzi Hospital, Milan, Italy
- Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Matteo Meglioli
- Center of Dental Medicine, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Via Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy
| | - Francesco Gallo
- Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
- Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Italian Stomatologic Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Guido Maria Macaluso
- Center of Dental Medicine, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Via Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy.
- IMEM-CNR, Parco Area delle Scienze 37/A, 43124, Parma, Italy.
| | - Sara Tagliaferri
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Via Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy
- CERT, Center of Excellence for Toxicological Research, University of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Andrea Toffoli
- Center of Dental Medicine, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Via Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy
| | - Benedetta Ghezzi
- Center of Dental Medicine, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Via Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy
| | - Simone Lumetti
- Center of Dental Medicine, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Via Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Costa V, Silva AS, Costa R, Barreiros P, Mendes J, Mendes JM. In Vitro Comparison of Three Intraoral Scanners for Implant-Supported Dental Prostheses. Dent J (Basel) 2022; 10:dj10060112. [PMID: 35735654 PMCID: PMC9221835 DOI: 10.3390/dj10060112] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2022] [Revised: 05/31/2022] [Accepted: 06/08/2022] [Indexed: 12/10/2022] Open
Abstract
With continuing technological developments, there have been advances in the field of fixed prosthetics, particularly in impression-taking techniques. These technological advances mean that a wide variety of diagnostic and/or rehabilitation possibilities can be explored without the need for physical models. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of three intraoral scanners used in oral implant rehabilitation using an extraoral scanner as a reference and varying the scanning area. Three models representing different clinical scenarios were scanned 15 times by each intraoral scanner and three times by the extraoral scanner. The readings were analyzed and overlaid using engineering software (Geomagic® Control X software (Artec Europe, Luxembourg)). Statistically significant differences in accuracy were found between the three intraoral scanners, iTero® (Align Technology Inc., San Jose, CA, USA), Medit® (Medit®: Seoul, Korea), and Planmeca® (Planmeca®: Helsinki, Finland). In all clinical scenarios, the iTero® scanner had the best trueness (24.4 μm), followed by the Medit® (26.4 μm) and Planmeca® (42.1 μm). The Medit® showed the best precision (18.00 μm) followed by the iTero® (19.20 μm) and Planmeca® (34.30 μm). We concluded that the iTero® scanner had the highest reproducibility and accuracy in the clinical setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vitória Costa
- Department of Dental Sciences, University Institute of Health Sciences (IUCS), CESPU, 4585-116 Gandra, Portugal; (V.C.); (R.C.)
| | - António Sérgio Silva
- UNIPRO—Oral Pathology and Rehabilitation Research Unit, University Institute of Health Sciences (IUCS), CESPU, 4585-116 Gandra, Portugal; (P.B.); (J.M.); (J.M.M.)
- Correspondence:
| | - Rosana Costa
- Department of Dental Sciences, University Institute of Health Sciences (IUCS), CESPU, 4585-116 Gandra, Portugal; (V.C.); (R.C.)
| | - Pedro Barreiros
- UNIPRO—Oral Pathology and Rehabilitation Research Unit, University Institute of Health Sciences (IUCS), CESPU, 4585-116 Gandra, Portugal; (P.B.); (J.M.); (J.M.M.)
| | - Joana Mendes
- UNIPRO—Oral Pathology and Rehabilitation Research Unit, University Institute of Health Sciences (IUCS), CESPU, 4585-116 Gandra, Portugal; (P.B.); (J.M.); (J.M.M.)
| | - José Manuel Mendes
- UNIPRO—Oral Pathology and Rehabilitation Research Unit, University Institute of Health Sciences (IUCS), CESPU, 4585-116 Gandra, Portugal; (P.B.); (J.M.); (J.M.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Accuracy of Digital Dental Implants Impression Taking with Intraoral Scanners Compared with Conventional Impression Techniques: A Systematic Review of In Vitro Studies. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:ijerph19042026. [PMID: 35206217 PMCID: PMC8872312 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19042026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2021] [Revised: 02/04/2022] [Accepted: 02/07/2022] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the in vitro accuracy of dental implants impressions taken with intraoral scanner compared with impressions taken with conventional techniques. Two independent reviewers conducted a systematic electronic search in the PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases. Some of the employed key terms, combined with the help of Boolean operators, were: "dental implants", "impression accuracy", "digital impression" and "conventional impression". Publication dates ranged from the earliest article available until 31 July 2021. A total of 26 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria: 14 studies simulated complete edentation (CE), nine partial edentation (PE) and only two simulated a single implant (SI); One study simulated both CE and SI. In cases of PE and SI, most of the studies analyzed found greater accuracy with conventional impression (CI), although digital impression (DI) was also considered adequate. For CE the findings were inconclusive as six studies found greater accuracy with DI, five found better accuracy with CI and four found no differences. According to the results of this systematic review, DI is a valid alternative to CI for implants in PE and SI, although CI appear to be more accurate. For CE the findings were inconclusive, so more studies are needed before DI can be recommended for all implant-supported restorations.
Collapse
|
11
|
Arcuri L, Lio F, Campana V, Mazzetti V, Federici FR, Nardi A, Galli M. Influence of Implant Scanbody Wear on the Accuracy of Digital Impression for Complete-Arch: A Randomized In Vitro Trial. MATERIALS 2022; 15:ma15030927. [PMID: 35160873 PMCID: PMC8838002 DOI: 10.3390/ma15030927] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2021] [Revised: 01/21/2022] [Accepted: 01/22/2022] [Indexed: 12/04/2022]
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of implant scanbody (ISB) wear on the accuracy of digital impression for complete-arch. A polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) edentulous mandibular model with four internal hexagonal interlocking conical connections was scanned with an extraoral optical scanner to achieve a reference file. Four cylindrical polyetheretherketone (PEEK) ISBs were scanned 30 times with IOS, and the test files were aligned to the reference file with a best-fit algorithm. For each analog linear (ΔX, ΔY and ΔZ-axis) and angular deviations (ΔANGLE) were assessed. Euclidean distance (ΔEUC) was calculated from the linear deviation, reporting a mean of 82 µm (SD 61) ranging from 8 to 347 µm. ΔANGLE error mean was 0.33° (SD 0.20), ranging from 0.02 to 0.92°. From a multivariate analysis, when ΔEUC was considered as a response variable, a significant influence of ISB wear by scan number in interaction to position for implant 3.6 was identified (p < 0.0001); when ΔANGLE was considered as a response variable, a significant effect of position 3.6 was recorded ((p < 0.0001). The obtained results showed that the ISB wear negatively influenced the accuracy of IOS, suggesting that ISB base wear could be detrimental for the seating of ISBs on angulated implants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lorenzo Arcuri
- Materials for Health, Environment and Energy, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy; (L.A.); (V.M.)
| | - Fabrizio Lio
- Materials for Health, Environment and Energy, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy; (L.A.); (V.M.)
- Correspondence:
| | | | - Vincenzo Mazzetti
- Materials for Health, Environment and Energy, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy; (L.A.); (V.M.)
| | - Francesca Romana Federici
- Innovative Technologies in Skeletal, Skin and Oro-Cranio-Facial Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy;
| | - Alessandra Nardi
- Department of Mathematics, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy;
| | - Massimo Galli
- Department of Dental and Maxillofacial Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy;
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Çakmak G, Yilmaz H, Treviño Santos A, Kökat AM, Yilmaz B. Effect of Scanner Type and Scan Body Location on the Accuracy of Mandibular Complete-Arch Digital Implant Scans: An In Vitro Study. J Prosthodont 2021; 31:419-426. [PMID: 34453466 PMCID: PMC9290536 DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2021] [Accepted: 08/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of scans of a newly introduced intraoral scanner (IOS) (Virtuo Vivo) and a widely used IOS (Trios 3) to a laboratory scanner (LBS) (Cares 7 SERIES) for 6 implants placed in an edentulous mandible, and to investigate the effect of scan body location on trueness. Material and methods Scanbodies were tightened on 6 implants placed in an edentulous polymethylmethacrylate mandibular model. An industrial scanner was utilized to generate a master reference model STL file. Three different scanners were used to scan the model (2 IOSs and 1 LBS), and the scans (n = 10) were exported into STL files. Best‐fitting algorithm was used to superimpose test scans over the MRM‐STL (nominal). ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests were performed to analyze the data (α = 0.05). Results The distance deviations in Car7‐LBS scans were the highest (p < 0.001), whereas those in Tri‐IOS scans were the lowest (p < 0.001). Vir‐IOS had lower angular deviations than those of Tri‐IOS (p = 0.031). In Vir‐IOS scans, SB5 had higher distance deviations than SB2 (p = 0.029) and SB3 (p = 0.044). In Car7‐LBS scans, SB1 had higher distance deviations than SB3 (p = 0.015) and SB5 (p = 0.005). In Tri‐IOS scans, SB1 had higher mean distance deviations than SB2 and SB5 (p = 0.005). Vir‐IOS had lower precision than Car7‐LBS (distance deviation data) (p = 0.01). No difference was found among scanners for the precision of angular deviation data (p = 0.840). Conclusion When trueness and precision were considered, distance and angular deviations depended on the scanner type. None of the scanners outperformed others in accuracy considering all distance and angular deviations. Scan body location affected only the trueness (distance deviations).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gülce Çakmak
- Buser Foundation Scholar for Implant Dentistry, Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Hakan Yilmaz
- Department of Orthodontics, Yeditepe University, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Alejandro Treviño Santos
- Postdoctoral and Research Division, Faculty of Dentistry, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - Ali Murat Kökat
- Department of Prosthodontics, Istanbul Okan University, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Burak Yilmaz
- Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.,Department of Restorative, Preventive and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.,Division of Restorative and Prosthetic Dentistry, The Ohio State University College of Dentistry, OH
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
The Influence of Hard- and Software Improvement of Intraoral Scanners on the Implant Transfer Accuracy from 2012 to 2021: An In Vitro Study. APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/app11157166] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the transfer accuracy (trueness and precision) of three different intraoral scanning families using different hardware and software versions over the last decade from 2012 to 2021, compared to a conventional impression. Therefore, an implant master model with a reference cube was digitized and served as a reference dataset. Digital impressions of all three scanning families (True definition, TRIOS, CEREC) were recorded (n = 10 per group), and conventional implant impressions were taken (n = 10). The conventional models were digitized, and all models (conventional and digital) were measured. Therefore, it was possible to obtain the deviations between the master model and the scans or conventional models in terms of absolute three-dimensional (3D) deviations, deviations in rotation, and angulation. The results for deviations between the older and newer scanning systems were analyzed using pairwise comparisons (p < 0.05; SPSS 26). The absolute 3D deviations increased with increasing scan path length, particularly for the older hardware and software versions (old vs. new (MW ± SD) True Definition: 355 ± 62 µm vs. 483 ± 110 µm; TRIOS: 574 ± 274 µm vs. 258 ± 100 µm; and CEREC: 1356 ± 1023 µm vs. 110 ± 49 µm). This was also true for deviations in rotation and angulation. The conventional impression showed an advantage only regarding the absolute 3D deviation compared to the older systems. Based on the data of the present study, the accuracy of intraoral scanners is decisively related to hardware and software; though, newer systems or software do not necessarily warrant improvement. Nevertheless, to achieve high transfer accuracy, regular updating of digital systems is recommended. The challenge of increasing errors with increasing scan paths is overcome in the most recent systems. The combination of two different scanning principles in a single device seems to be beneficial.
Collapse
|
14
|
Schmidt A, Rein PE, Wöstmann B, Schlenz MA. A comparative clinical study on the transfer accuracy of conventional and digital implant impressions using a new reference key-based method. Clin Oral Implants Res 2021; 32:460-469. [PMID: 33469983 DOI: 10.1111/clr.13715] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2020] [Revised: 01/10/2021] [Accepted: 01/13/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The objective of this study was to systematically compare the transfer accuracy of conventional and digital implant impressions in patients using a new reference key-based method. MATERIAL AND METHODS Thirty-nine cases were included in the study (upper jaw 22 edentulous, 8 partially edentulous, average distance between implants 30.15 ± 11.18 mm; lower jaw 6 cases edentulous, 3 cases partially edentulous, average distance between implants 33.19 ± 14.85 mm). Individual reference keys were manufactured and reversibly fixed on implants. A conventional (CVI) and a digital (DI) implant impression was made. The implant positions (center points) of conventional and digital models were measured (coordinate-measuring machine/three-dimensional analysis software) and superimposed with the positions of the reference keys to compare the deviations of the conventional and digital models. For statistical analysis, ANOVA with MIXED procedure was applied (p < .05). RESULTS Mean deviation ranged from 0.040±0.029 mm (DI/upper jaw) to 0.079 ± 0.050 mm (DI/lower jaw). There were significant differences between the CVI and DI impressions in the lower jaw (p < .05). No significant differences in transfer accuracy were found between partially and completely edentulous patients for the impression methods. CONCLUSIONS Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that full-arch digital implant impressions of the upper jaw in partially or completely edentulous patients showed comparable results to conventional implant impressions. However, with regard to the implant position transfer accuracy, there are still limitations for digital impression in the lower jaw.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Schmidt
- Department of Prosthodontics - School of Dental Medicine, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany
| | | | - Bernd Wöstmann
- Department of Prosthodontics - School of Dental Medicine, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Knechtle N, Wiedemeier D, Mehl A, Ender A. Accuracy of digital complete-arch, multi-implant scans made in the edentulous jaw with gingival movement simulation: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2021; 128:468-478. [DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.12.037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2020] [Revised: 12/20/2020] [Accepted: 12/21/2020] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
|
16
|
Banjar A, Chen YW, Kostagianni A, Finkelman M, Papathanasiou A, Chochlidakis K, Papaspyridakos P. Accuracy of 3D Printed Implant Casts Versus Stone Casts: A Comparative Study in the Anterior Maxilla. J Prosthodont 2021; 30:783-788. [PMID: 33474754 DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13335] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To conduct an in vitro comparison of the amount of three-dimensional (3D) deviation of 3D printed casts generated from digital implant impressions with an intraoral scanner (IOS) to stone casts made of conventional impressions. MATERIAL AND METHODS A maxillary master cast with partially edentulous anterior area was fabricated with two internal connection implants (Regular CrossFit, Straumann). Stone casts (n = 10) that served as a control were fabricated with the splinted open-tray impression technique. Twenty digital impressions were made using a white light IOS (TRIOS, 3shape) and the Standard Tesselation Language (STL) files obtained were saved. Based on the STL files, a digital light processing (DLP) and a stereolithographic (SLA) 3D printer (Varseo S and Form 2) were used to print casts (n = 10 from each 3D printer). The master cast and all casts generated from each group were digitized using the same IOS. The STL files obtained were superimposed on the master cast STL file (reference) to evaluate the amount of 3D deviation with inspection software using the root mean square value (RMS). The independent-samples Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn's test with Bonferroni correction (for post hoc comparisons) were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS The Varseo S group had the lowest median RMS value [77.5 µm (IQR = 91.4-135.4)], followed closely by the Conventional group [77.7 µm (IQR = 61.5-93.4)]. The Form 2 had the highest mean value [98.8 µm (IQR = 57.6-87.9)]. The independent-samples Kruskal-Wallis test revealed a significant difference between the groups (p = 0.018). Post hoc testing revealed a significant difference between Varseo S and Form 2 (p = 0.009). CONCLUSION The casts generated from the Varseo S 3D printer had better 3D accuracy than did those from the Form 2 3D printer. Both the Varseo S group and the conventional stone casts groups had similar 3D accuracy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ayman Banjar
- Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.,Department of Prosthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA
| | - Yo-Wei Chen
- Department of Prosthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA
| | | | - Matthew Finkelman
- Department of Public Health and Community Service, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA
| | | | - Konstantinos Chochlidakis
- Department of Prosthodontics, University of Rochester Eastman Institute for Oral Health, Rochester, NY
| | - Panos Papaspyridakos
- Department of Prosthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA.,Department of Prosthodontics, University of Rochester Eastman Institute for Oral Health, Rochester, NY
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Michelinakis G, Apostolakis D, Kamposiora P, Papavasiliou G, Özcan M. The direct digital workflow in fixed implant prosthodontics: a narrative review. BMC Oral Health 2021; 21:37. [PMID: 33478459 PMCID: PMC7819204 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-021-01398-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2020] [Accepted: 01/13/2021] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The purpose of this narrative review was to examine the applicability of IOS procedures regarding single and multiple fixed implant restorations. Clinical outcomes for monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate restorations produced through a direct digital workflow were reported. METHODS A MEDLINE (Pubmed) search of the relevant English-language literature spanning from January 1st 2015 until March 31st 2020 was conducted. In vitro studies comparing digital implant impression accuracy by different IOS devices or in vitro studies examining differences in accuracy between digital and conventional impression procedures were included. Also, RCTs, clinical trials and case series on the success and/or survival of monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate restorations on implants, manufactured completely digitally were included. In vitro and in vivo studies reporting on restorations produced through an indirect digital workflow, case reports and non-English language articles were excluded. The aim was to investigate the accuracy of IOS for single and multiple fixed implant restorations compared to the conventional impression methods and report on the variables that influence it. Finally, this study aimed to report on the survival and success of fixed implant-retained restorations fabricated using the direct digital workflow. RESULTS For the single and short-span implant sites, IOS accuracy was high and the deviations in the position of the virtual implant fell within the acceptable clinical limits. In the complete edentulous arch with multiple implants, no consensus regarding the superiority of the conventional, splinted, custom tray impression procedure compared to the IOS impression was identified. Moreover, complete-arch IOS impressions were more accurate than conventional, non-splinted, open or close tray impressions. Factors related to scanbody design as well as scanner generation, scanning range and interimplant distance were found to influence complete-arch scanning accuracy. Single implant-retained monolithic restorations exhibited high success and survival rates and minor complications for short to medium follow-up periods. CONCLUSIONS The vast majority of identified studies were in vitro and this limited their clinical significance. Nevertheless, intraoral scanning exhibited high accuracy both for single and multiple implant restorations. Available literature on single-implant monolithic restorations manufactured through a complete digital workflow shows promising results for a follow-up of 3-5 years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Phophi Kamposiora
- Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - George Papavasiliou
- Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Mutlu Özcan
- Division of Dental Biomaterials, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine, Clinic for Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
García-Gil I, Cortés-Bretón-Brinkmann J, Jiménez-García J, Peláez-Rico J, Suárez-García MJ. Precision and practical usefulness of intraoral scanners in implant dentistry: A systematic literature review. J Clin Exp Dent 2020; 12:e784-e793. [PMID: 32913577 PMCID: PMC7474947 DOI: 10.4317/jced.57025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2020] [Accepted: 05/14/2020] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Background This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficiency and accuracy of digital impression techniques for implant-supported restorations, and to assess their economic feasibility.
Material and Methods Two independent electronic database searches were conducted in the Pubmed/MedLine, Cochrane Library, and Lilacs databases complimented by a manual search, selecting relevant clinical and in vitro studies published between 1st January 2009 and 28st February 2019. All type of studies (in vivo and in vitro) were included in this systematic review.
Results Twenty-seven studies (8 in vivo and 19 in vitro studies) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. No meta-analysis was performed due to a large heterogeneity of the study protocols. The passive fit of superstructures on dental implants presented similar results between digital and conventional impression techniques. The studies considered that several factors influence the accuracy of implant impression taking: distance and angulation between implants, depth of placement, type of scanner, scanning strategy, characteristics of scanbody, and operator experience. Regarding the economic viability of intraoral scanning systems, only one study reported any benefit in comparison with conventional techniques.
Conclusions Digital impressions of dental implants can be considered a viable alternative in cases of one or two contiguous dental implants. However, more studies are needed to evaluate the accuracy of digital techniques in full-arch implant-supported restorations. Key words:Intraoral scanner, dental implant, prosthesis, misfit, systematic review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ignacio García-Gil
- DDS, MS. Master Program Advanced Oral Implantology Europea University of Madrid. Master Program Buccofacial Prostheses and Occlusion, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid
| | - Jorge Cortés-Bretón-Brinkmann
- DDS, PhD, MS. Researcher/Assistant Professor of Oral Surgery and Buccofacial Prostheses, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid
| | - Jaime Jiménez-García
- DDS, PhD, MS. Full profesor and Chairman. Implantology Department, European University of Madrid. Surgical Director of CIRO, Madrid
| | - Jesus Peláez-Rico
- DDS, PhD, MS. Assistant Professor. Department Conservative Dentistry and Buccofacial Prostheses, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid
| | - María-Jesús Suárez-García
- MD, DDS, PhD, MS. Full Professor. Department Conservative Dentistry and Buccofacial Prostheses, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Revilla-León M, Fogarty R, Barrington JJ, Zandinejad A, Özcan M. Influence of scan body design and digital implant analogs on implant replica position in additively manufactured casts. J Prosthet Dent 2020; 124:202-210. [DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.07.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2019] [Revised: 07/12/2019] [Accepted: 07/15/2019] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
|
20
|
Papaspyridakos P, Vazouras K, Chen Y, Kotina E, Natto Z, Kang K, Chochlidakis K. Digital vs Conventional Implant Impressions: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis. J Prosthodont 2020; 29:660-678. [DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13211] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/08/2020] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Panos Papaspyridakos
- Department of Prosthodontics Tufts University School of Dental Medicine Boston MA
- Department of Prosthodontics, Eastman Institute for Oral Health University of Rochester Rochester NY
| | | | - Yo‐wei Chen
- Department of Prosthodontics Tufts University School of Dental Medicine Boston MA
| | | | - Zuhair Natto
- Department of Dental Public Health King Abdulaziz University Jeddah Saudi Arabia
- Department of Periodontology Tufts University School of Dental Medicine Boston MA
| | - Kiho Kang
- Department of Prosthodontics Tufts University School of Dental Medicine Boston MA
| | - Konstantinos Chochlidakis
- Department of Prosthodontics, Eastman Institute for Oral Health University of Rochester Rochester NY
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Maria R, Tan MY, Wong KM, Lee BCH, Chia VAP, Tan KBC. Accuracy of Implant Analogs in 3D Printed Resin Models. J Prosthodont 2020; 30:57-64. [PMID: 32567126 DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13217] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2020] [Revised: 06/14/2020] [Accepted: 06/15/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To study the effect of implant analog system, print orientation, and analog holder radial offset on 3D linear and absolute angular distortions of implant analogs in 3D printed resin models. MATERIALS AND METHODS A sectional master model simulating a 2-implant, 3-unit fixed prosthesis in a partially edentulous jaw was fabricated. Three implant analog systems for 3D printed resin models-Straumann (ST), Core3DCentres (CD) and Medentika (MD)-were tested. The corresponding scan bodies were secured onto the implants and scanned using an intraoral scanner. Models were obtained with a Digital Light Processing printer. Each implant analog system had 2 print orientations (transverse [X] and perpendicular [Y] to the printer door) and 2 analog holder radial offsets (0.04 mm and 0.06 mm), for a total of 60 models. The physical positions of the implants in the master model and the analogs in the printed resin models were directly measured with a Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM). 3D linear distortion (ΔR) and absolute angular distortion (Absdθ) defined the 3D accuracy of the analogs in the printed models. Univariate ANOVA was used to analyse data followed by post hoc tests (Tukey HSD, α = 0.05). RESULTS Mean ΔR for ST (-155.7 ± 60.6 µm), CD (124.9 ± 65.0 µm) and MD (-92.9 ± 48.0 µm) were significantly different (p < 0.01). Mean Absdθ was not significantly different between ST (0.57 ± 0.48°) and CD (0.41 ± 0.27°), but both were significantly different from MD (2.11 ± 1.14°) (p < 0.01). Print orientation had a significant effect on ΔR only but no discernible trend could be found. Analog holder radial offset had no significant effect on ΔR and Absdθ. CONCLUSIONS Implant analog system had a significant effect on ΔR and Absdθ. Compared to the master model, CD produced greater mean interanalog distances, while ST and MD produced smaller mean interanalog distances. MD exhibited the greatest mean angular distortion which was significantly greater than ST and CD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rahmat Maria
- Department of Restorative Dentistry, National Dental Centre of Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| | - Ming Yi Tan
- Faculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| | - Keng Mun Wong
- Faculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| | - Bruce Chi Hong Lee
- Faculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| | - Vanessa Ai Ping Chia
- Department of Restorative Dentistry, National Dental Centre of Singapore, Republic of Singapore
| | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Revilla-León M, Smith Z, Methani MM, Zandinejad A, Özcan M. Influence of scan body design on accuracy of the implant position as transferred to a virtual definitive implant cast. J Prosthet Dent 2020; 125:918-923. [PMID: 32493568 DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.03.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2019] [Revised: 03/23/2020] [Accepted: 03/23/2020] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM Previous studies have analyzed factors influencing intraoral scanner accuracy; however, how the intraoral scan body design affects the implant position on the virtual definitive cast is unclear. PURPOSE The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure the discrepancies of the implant replica positions of the virtual definitive implant cast obtained by using 3 different scan body designs when performing a digital scan. MATERIAL AND METHODS A partially edentulous typodont with 3 implant replicas (Implant Replica RP Branemark system; Nobel Biocare Services AG) was prepared. Three groups were determined based on the scan body system evaluated: SB-1 (Elos Accurate Nobel Biocare), SB-2 (NT Digital Implant Technology), and SB-3 (Dynamic Abutment). Each scan body was positioned on each implant replica of the typodont, and was digitized by using an intraoral scanner (iTero Element; Cadent) as per the manufacturer's scanning protocol at 1000 lux illuminance. A standard tessellation language (STL) file was obtained. Before the scan bodies were removed from the typodont, a coordinate measuring machine (CMM Contura G2 10/16/06 RDS; Carl Zeiss Industrielle Messtechnik GmbH) was used to measure the scan body positions on the x-, y-, and z-axis. The linear and angular discrepancies between the position of the scan bodies on the typodont and STL file were calculated by using the best fit technique with a specific program (Calypso; Carl Zeiss Industrielle Messtechnik GmbH). The procedure was repeated until 10 STL files were obtained per group. The Shapiro-Wilk test revealed that the data were not normally distributed. The data were analyzed by using the Mann-Whitney U test (α=.05). RESULTS The coordinate measuring machine was unable to measure the scan body positions of the magnetically retained SB-3 group because of its mobility when palpating at the smallest pressure possible. Therefore, this group was excluded. No significant differences were found in the linear discrepancies between the SB-1 and SB-2 groups (P>.05). The most accurate scan body position was obtained on the z-axis. However, the SB-1 group revealed a significantly higher XZ angular discrepancy than the SB-2 group (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS The scan body systems tested (SB-1 and SB-2 groups) accurately transferred the linear implant positions to the virtual definitive implant cast. However, significant differences were observed in the XZ angular implant positions between the scan body systems analyzed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marta Revilla-León
- Assistant Professor and Assistant Program Director AEGD residency, College of Dentistry, Texas A&M University, Dallas, Texas; Affiliate Faculty Graduate Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash; Researcher at Revilla Research Center, Madrid, Spain.
| | - Zachary Smith
- Graduate student AEGD residency, College of Dentistry, Texas A&M University, Dallas, Texas
| | - Mohammed M Methani
- Student Master of Science in Oral Biology, College of Dentistry, Texas A&M University, Dallas, Texas
| | - Amirali Zandinejad
- Associate Professor and Program Director AEGD residency, College of Dentistry, Texas A&M University, Dallas, Texas
| | - Mutlu Özcan
- Professor and Head, Division of Dental Biomaterials, Clinic for Resconstructive Dentistry, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Chochlidakis K, Papaspyridakos P, Tsigarida A, Romeo D, Chen Y, Natto Z, Ercoli C. Digital Versus Conventional Full‐Arch Implant Impressions: A Prospective Study on 16 Edentulous Maxillae. J Prosthodont 2020; 29:281-286. [DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/10/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - Panos Papaspyridakos
- Department of ProsthodonticsEastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester NY
- Department of ProsthodonticsSchool of Dental MedicineTufts University Boston MA
| | - Alexandra Tsigarida
- Department of PeriodonticsEastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester NY
| | - Davide Romeo
- Department of ProsthodonticsEastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester NY
- Advanced Oral Surgery UnitVita Salute University, San Raffaele Hospital Milan Italy
| | - Yo‐wei Chen
- Department of ProsthodonticsSchool of Dental MedicineTufts University Boston MA
| | - Zuhair Natto
- Department of Dental Public HealthKing Abdulaziz University Jeddah Saudi Arabia
- Department of PeriodontologySchool of Dental Medicine, Tufts University Boston MA
| | - Carlo Ercoli
- Department of ProsthodonticsEastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester NY
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Sawase T, Kuroshima S. The current clinical relevancy of intraoral scanners in implant dentistry. Dent Mater J 2020; 39:57-61. [PMID: 31723067 DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2019-285] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Optical technology has provided a paradigm shift in implant dentistry. However, there is little information about the use of optical technology in implant dentistry, since this technology is relatively new and has been evolving under the current conditions. In the present narrative literature review, the effects of intraoral scanners (IOSs) use on accuracy and the operating time, as well as safety and patient perception, in implant dentistry were evaluated from the clinical perspective. The accuracy of digital scans with IOSs was comparable to the conventional impression techniques for single or partial prostheses, and the digital scans with IOSs are time efficient when taking impressions for single- or double-abutments. However, the accuracy and time efficiency are decreased for multiple implant scans or large-area scans with IOSs use. Patient satisfaction with and preference for IOSs scans are generally superior to those with conventional impression procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Takashi Sawase
- Department of Applied Prosthodontics, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki University
| | - Shinichiro Kuroshima
- Department of Applied Prosthodontics, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki University
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Kim RJY, Benic GI, Park JM. Trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0222070. [PMID: 31743331 PMCID: PMC6863547 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222070] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2019] [Accepted: 10/28/2019] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the trueness of 5 intraoral scanners (IOSs) for digital impression of simulated implant scan bodies in a partially edentulous model. A 3D printed partially edentulous mandible model made of Co-Cr with a total of 6 bilaterally positioned cylinders in the canine, second premolar, and second molar area served as the study model. Digital scans of the model were made with a reference scanner (steroSCAN neo) and 5 IOSs (CEREC Omnicam, CS3600, i500, iTero Element, and TRIOS 3) (n = 10). For each IOS’s dataset, the XYZ coordinates of the cylinders were obtained from the reference point and the deviations from the reference scanner were calculated using a 3D reverse engineering program (Rapidform). The trueness values were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney post hoc test. Direction and amount of deviation differed among cylinder position and among IOSs. Regardless of the IOS type, the cylinders positioned on the left second molar, nearest to the scanning start point, showed the smallest deviation. The deviation generally increased further away from scanning start point towards the right second molar. TRIOS 3 and i500 outperformed the other IOSs for partially edentulous digital impression. The accuracy of the CEREC Omnicam, CS3600, and iTero Element were similar on the left side, but they showed more deviations on the right side of the arch when compared to the other IOSs. The accuracy of IOS is still an area that needs to be improved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ryan Jin-Young Kim
- Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Goran I. Benic
- Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Ji-Man Park
- Department of Prosthodontics, Yonsei University, College of Dentistry, Seoul, South Korea
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Mangano FG, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Imburgia M, Mangano C, Admakin O. Trueness and precision of 5 intraoral scanners in the impressions of single and multiple implants: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health 2019; 19:101. [PMID: 31170969 PMCID: PMC6555024 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-019-0792-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 114] [Impact Index Per Article: 22.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2019] [Accepted: 05/20/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Until now, a few studies have addressed the accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs) in implantology. Hence, the aim of this in vitro study was to assess the accuracy of 5 different IOSs in the impressions of single and multiple implants, and to compare them. METHODS Plaster models were prepared, representative of a partially edentulous maxilla (PEM) to be restored with a single crown (SC) and a partial prosthesis (PP), and a totally edentulous maxilla (TEM) to be restored with a full-arch (FA). These models were scanned with a desktop scanner, to capture reference models (RMs), and with 5 IOSs (CS 3600®, Trios3®, Omnicam®, DWIO®, Emerald®); 10 scans were taken for each model, using each IOS. All IOS datasets were loaded into a reverse-engineering software where they were superimposed on the corresponding RMs, to evaluate trueness, and superimposed on each other within groups, to determine precision. A statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS In the SC, CS 3600® had the best trueness (15.2 ± 0.8 μm), followed by Trios3® (22.3 ± 0.5 μm), DWIO® (27.8 ± 3.2 μm), Omnicam® (28.4 ± 4.5 μm), Emerald® (43.1 ± 11.5 μm). In the PP, CS 3600® had the best trueness (23 ± 1.1 μm), followed by Trios3® (28.5 ± 0.5 μm), Omnicam® (38.1 ± 8.8 μm), Emerald® (49.3 ± 5.5 μm), DWIO® (49.8 ± 5 μm). In the FA, CS 3600® had the best trueness (44.9 ± 8.9 μm), followed by Trios3® (46.3 ± 4.9 μm), Emerald® (66.3 ± 5.6 μm), Omnicam® (70.4 ± 11.9 μm), DWIO® (92.1 ± 24.1 μm). Significant differences were found between the IOSs; a significant difference in trueness was found between the contexts (SC vs. PP vs. FA). In the SC, CS 3600® had the best precision (11.3 ± 1.1 μm), followed by Trios3® (15.2 ± 0.8 μm), DWIO® (27.1 ± 10.7 μm), Omnicam® (30.6 ± 3.3 μm), Emerald® (32.8 ± 10.7 μm). In the PP, CS 3600® had the best precision (17 ± 2.3 μm), followed by Trios3® (21 ± 1.9 μm), Emerald® (29.9 ± 8.9 μm), DWIO® (34.8 ± 10.8 μm), Omnicam® (43.2 ± 9.4 μm). In the FA, Trios3® had the best precision (35.6 ± 3.4 μm), followed by CS 3600® (35.7 ± 4.3 μm), Emerald® (61.5 ± 18.1 μm), Omnicam® (89.3 ± 14 μm), DWIO® (111 ± 24.8 μm). Significant differences were found between the IOSs; a significant difference in precision was found between the contexts (SC vs. PP vs. FA). CONCLUSIONS The IOSs showed significant differences between them, both in trueness and in precision. The mathematical error increased in the transition from SC to PP up to FA, both in trueness than in precision.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Guido Mangano
- Department of Prevention and Communal Dentistry, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia.
| | - Uli Hauschild
- Department of Post-graduate Education, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, J.W. Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Giovanni Veronesi
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, Research Center in Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, University of Varese, Varese, Italy
| | | | - Carlo Mangano
- Department of Dental Sciences, Vita and Salute University San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Oleg Admakin
- Department of Prevention and Communal Dentistry, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Jiang X, Lin Y, Cui HY, Di P. Immediate loading of multiple splinted implants via complete digital workflow: A pilot clinical study with 1-year follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2019; 21:446-453. [PMID: 31025525 DOI: 10.1111/cid.12781] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Complete digital workflow attracts more attention in implant dentistry. OBJECTIVES To explore the feasibility and short-term clinical results of immediate loading of multiple implants with fixed temporary bridges (2-4 teeth span) by complete digital workflow, and to evaluate the three-dimensional (3D) deviation of digital impression comparing with traditional impression method. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 31 partial edentulous patients (16 females and 15 males) were recruited in this study. Digital impressions were taken immediately after implant placement, and implant-supported splinted temporary bridges were fabricated through a full digital approach (model free) and delivered within 24 hours. Final restorations were finished 4 months after surgery via traditional impression technique. Subjects were followed 1 year after treatment. 3D impression deviations were analyzed by comparing the digital and conventional impression methods. Time costs for the full digital approach were recorded. Implant survival rate, marginal bone levels were evaluated. RESULTS All the recruited subjects finished this study. Seventy-four implants were surgically placed and immediately loaded with 34 temporary bridges fabricated through a full digital approach. Digital impression deviation compared with traditional impression method was 27.43 ± 13.47 μm. Time costs for chair side and laboratory were 32.55 ± 4.73 and 69.30 ± 10.87 minutes, respectively. Marginal bone alterations were -1.58 mm and -1.69 mm at the time of 4 and 12 months after surgery. The implants had a survival rate of 100% at the 1-year follow-up time. CONCLUSIONS Immediate loading of multiple implants in partial edentulous (2-4 teeth span) patients with full digital approach is clinically applicable. The 3D discrepancy between digital and traditional impression is within clinical acceptable range.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xi Jiang
- Department of Oral Implantology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Ye Lin
- Department of Oral Implantology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Hong Y Cui
- Department of Oral Implantology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| | - Ping Di
- Department of Oral Implantology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Abstract
PURPOSE The objective was to provide a comprehensive systematic review about the accuracy of digital implant impression in comparison with the conventional implant impression approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane databases were used to classify the related articles with no year limitation in 3 stages by 2 reviewers. Finally, 10 articles were included based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULTS Five articles supported the use of intraoral scanners in implant dentistry. The two in vivo pilot studies showed that digital scanning is not reliable and could not be used in clinical routine. CONCLUSION Because each study included in this review has its unique methodology and design, it is therefore early to conclude whether to use digital scanners for clinical practice or not. More well-conducted in vitro and clinical trials studies are recommended to investigate the accuracy of intraoral scanners.
Collapse
|
29
|
Stanley M, Paz AG, Miguel I, Coachman C. Fully digital workflow, integrating dental scan, smile design and CAD-CAM: case report. BMC Oral Health 2018; 18:134. [PMID: 30086753 PMCID: PMC6081948 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-018-0597-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2018] [Accepted: 07/25/2018] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background This report is a presentation of a clinical case that follows a full digital workflow. Case presentation A 47-year old man presented with pain in the TMJ (temporomandibular joint) and whose aesthetic concern was having a chipped maxillary central incisor veneer. The concern was solved following a fully digital workflow: it was applied the digital smile design protocol, as well as CAD-CAM monolithic lithium disilicate ceramic veneers and crowns (following a minimal invasive preparation approach). The aim of this rehabilitation was to solve a loss of vertical dimension, subsequent aesthetics and temporomandibular joint disorders. Conclusion Thanks to the evolution of technology in dentistry, it is possible to do a full digital case and solve problems such as loss of vertical dimension successfully. Nevertheless, more clinical studies are needed to obtain consistent results about the digital work flow compared to the conventional technique in loss of vertical dimension cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miguel Stanley
- Private Practice at White Clinic, Rua Dr. António Loureiro Borges. Edif. 5, 1° Andar Arquiparque; 1495-131 Algés-, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Ana Gomes Paz
- Private Practice at White Clinic, Rua Dr. António Loureiro Borges. Edif. 5, 1° Andar Arquiparque; 1495-131 Algés-, Lisbon, Portugal. .,Endodontic Department at FMDUL, Private Practice at White Clinic, Rua Dr. António Loureiro Borges. Edif. 5, 1° Andar Arquiparque, 1495-131, Algés, Portugal.
| | - Inês Miguel
- Private Practice at White Clinic, Rua Dr. António Loureiro Borges. Edif. 5, 1° Andar Arquiparque; 1495-131 Algés-, Lisbon, Portugal
| | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Alshawaf B, Weber HP, Finkelman M, El Rafie K, Kudara Y, Papaspyridakos P. Accuracy of printed casts generated from digital implant impressions versus stone casts from conventional implant impressions: A comparative in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018; 29:835-842. [DOI: 10.1111/clr.13297] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2017] [Revised: 04/24/2018] [Accepted: 05/02/2018] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Bahaa Alshawaf
- Division of Postgraduate Prosthodontics; Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Hans-Peter Weber
- Division of Postgraduate Prosthodontics; Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Matthew Finkelman
- Department of Public Health and Community Service; Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Khaled El Rafie
- Division of Postgraduate Prosthodontics; Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Yukio Kudara
- Division of Postgraduate Prosthodontics; Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; Boston Massachusetts
| | - Panos Papaspyridakos
- Division of Postgraduate Prosthodontics; Tufts University School of Dental Medicine; Boston Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Alsharbaty MHM, Alikhasi M, Zarrati S, Shamshiri AR. A Clinical Comparative Study of 3-Dimensional Accuracy between Digital and Conventional Implant Impression Techniques. J Prosthodont 2018; 28:e902-e908. [PMID: 29423969 DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12764] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/16/2017] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the accuracy of a digital implant impression technique using a TRIOS 3Shape intraoral scanner (IOS) compared to conventional implant impression techniques (pick-up and transfer) in clinical situations. MATERIALS AND METHODS Thirty-six patients who had two implants (Implantium, internal connection) ranging in diameter between 3.8 and 4.8 mm in posterior regions participated in this study after signing a consent form. Thirty-six reference models (RM) were fabricated by attaching two impression copings intraorally, splinted with autopolymerizing acrylic resin, verified by sectioning through the middle of the index, and rejoined again with freshly mixed autopolymerizing acrylic resin pattern (Pattern Resin) with the brush bead method. After that, the splinted assemblies were attached to implant analogs (DANSE) and impressed with type III dental stone (Gypsum Microstone) in standard plastic die lock trays. Thirty-six working casts were fabricated for each conventional impression technique (i.e., pick-up and transfer). Thirty-six digital impressions were made with a TRIOS 3Shape IOS. Eight of the digitally scanned files were damaged; 28 digital scan files were retrieved to STL format. A coordinate-measuring machine (CMM) was used to record linear displacement measurements (x, y, and z-coordinates), interimplant distances, and angular displacements for the RMs and conventionally fabricated working casts. CATIA 3D evaluation software was used to assess the digital STL files for the same variables as the CMM measurements. CMM measurements made on the RMs and conventionally fabricated working casts were compared with 3D software measurements made on the digitally scanned files. Data were statistically analyzed using the generalized estimating equation (GEE) with an exchangeable correlation matrix and linear method, followed by the Bonferroni method for pairwise comparisons (α = 0.05). RESULTS The results showed significant differences between the pick-up and digital groups in all of the measured variables (p < 0.001). Concerning the transfer and digital groups, the results were statistically significant in angular displacement (p < 0.001), distance measurements (p = 0.01), and linear displacement (p = 0.03); however, between the pick-up and transfer groups, there was no statistical significance in all of the measured variables (interimplant distance deviation, linear displacement, and angular displacement deviations). CONCLUSIONS According to the results of this study, the digital implant impression technique had the least accuracy. Based on the study outcomes, distance and angulation errors associated with the intraoral digital implant impressions were too large to fabricate well-fitting restorations for partially edentulous patients. The pick-up implant impression technique was the most accurate, and the transfer technique revealed comparable accuracy to it.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Marzieh Alikhasi
- International Campus, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (IC-TUMS), Tehran, Iran.,Dental Research Center, Dentistry Research Institute, Department of Prosthodontics, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Simindokht Zarrati
- Dental Research Center, Dentistry Research Institute, Department of Prosthodontics, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Ahmed Reza Shamshiri
- Dental Research Center, Dentistry Research Institute, Department of Prosthodontics, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Imburgia M, Logozzo S, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Mangano C, Mangano FG. Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health 2017; 17:92. [PMID: 28577366 PMCID: PMC5455075 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-017-0383-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 193] [Impact Index Per Article: 27.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2017] [Accepted: 05/23/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Until now, only a few studies have compared the ability of different intraoral scanners (IOS) to capture high-quality impressions in patients with dental implants. Hence, the aim of this study was to compare the trueness and precision of four IOS in a partially edentulous model (PEM) with three implants and in a fully edentulous model (FEM) with six implants. METHODS Two gypsum models were prepared with respectively three and six implant analogues, and polyether-ether-ketone cylinders screwed on. These models were scanned with a reference scanner (ScanRider®), and with four IOS (CS3600®, Trios3®, Omnicam®, TrueDefinition®); five scans were taken for each model, using each IOS. All IOS datasets were loaded into reverse-engineering software, where they were superimposed on the reference model, to evaluate trueness, and superimposed on each other within groups, to determine precision. A detailed statistical analysis was carried out. RESULTS In the PEM, CS3600® had the best trueness (45.8 ± 1.6μm), followed by Trios3® (50.2 ± 2.5μm), Omnicam® (58.8 ± 1.6μm) and TrueDefinition® (61.4 ± 3.0μm). Significant differences were found between CS3600® and Trios3®, CS3600® and Omnicam®, CS3600® and TrueDefinition®, Trios3® and Omnicam®, Trios3® and TrueDefinition®. In the FEM, CS3600® had the best trueness (60.6 ± 11.7μm), followed by Omnicam® (66.4 ± 3.9μm), Trios3® (67.2 ± 6.9μm) and TrueDefinition® (106.4 ± 23.1μm). Significant differences were found between CS3600® and TrueDefinition®, Trios3® and TrueDefinition®, Omnicam® and TrueDefinition®. For all scanners, the trueness values obtained in the PEM were significantly better than those obtained in the FEM. In the PEM, TrueDefinition® had the best precision (19.5 ± 3.1μm), followed by Trios3® (24.5 ± 3.7μm), CS3600® (24.8 ± 4.6μm) and Omnicam® (26.3 ± 1.5μm); no statistically significant differences were found among different IOS. In the FEM, Trios3® had the best precision (31.5 ± 9.8μm), followed by Omnicam® (57.2 ± 9.1μm), CS3600® (65.5 ± 16.7μm) and TrueDefinition® (75.3 ± 43.8μm); no statistically significant differences were found among different IOS. For CS3600®, For CS3600®, Omnicam® and TrueDefinition®, the values obtained in the PEM were significantly better than those obtained in the FEM; no significant differences were found for Trios3®. CONCLUSIONS Significant differences in trueness were found among different IOS; for each scanner, the trueness was higher in the PEM than in the FEM. Conversely, the IOS did not significantly differ in precision; for CS3600®, Omnicam® and TrueDefinition®, the precision was higher in the PEM than in the FEM. These findings may have important clinical implications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Silvia Logozzo
- Department of Engineering of the University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.,Department of Research and Development of V-GER, Bologna, Italy
| | | | - Giovanni Veronesi
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
| | - Carlo Mangano
- Department of Dental Science, University Vita Salute S. Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|