Cargando…

Accuracy between intraoral and extraoral scanning: Three-dimensional deviation and effect of distance between implants from two scanning methods

AIM: Evaluate the accuracy between the intraoral and extraoral scanning regarding the three dimensional (3D) deviation and distances between the implants, through 2 scanning methods. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: An in vitro study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An edentulous mandibular model was used to install fou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pereira, Ana Larisse Carneiro, Segundo, Henrique Vieira Melo, Júnior, Luiz Carlos Alves, Germano, Adriano Rocha, Carreiro, Adriana Da Fonte Porto
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9416955/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36511059
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_108_22
Descripción
Sumario:AIM: Evaluate the accuracy between the intraoral and extraoral scanning regarding the three dimensional (3D) deviation and distances between the implants, through 2 scanning methods. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: An in vitro study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An edentulous mandibular model was used to install four implants and abutments, recommending 6 distances between the implants. Scans were performed using an intraoral (SI) and extraoral (SE) scanner for each studied group: Scanning with the scan bodies (SB) and device (SD) (n = 10). The files were imported into a surface evaluation program to assess 3D deviations and measure distances between implants. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Precision was assessed as the difference between files (Kruskal–Wallis test), while trueness was assessed from the difference between scans, applying the Wilcoxon and Mann–Whitney test. RESULTS: As for the 3D deviations, SI showed accuracy, for the faces and positions of the implants in relation to the SE, in both scanning methods (P < 0.05). Regarding the capture of distances between implants, the SD scan obtained better trueness than the SB group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: We concluded that the type and scanning methods used did not influence the 3D deviations, while for distances, scanning with the device had better trueness.