Cargando…

Comparison of accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions: two and three dimensional evaluations

PURPOSE: The present study compared the accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The experimental models were divided into six groups depending on the implant location and the scanning span. Digital impressions were captured using the intraoral optical sc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bi, Chuang, Wang, Xingyu, Tian, Fangfang, Qu, Zhe, Zhao, Jiaming
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9444482/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36105881
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2022.14.4.236
_version_ 1784783230467047424
author Bi, Chuang
Wang, Xingyu
Tian, Fangfang
Qu, Zhe
Zhao, Jiaming
author_facet Bi, Chuang
Wang, Xingyu
Tian, Fangfang
Qu, Zhe
Zhao, Jiaming
author_sort Bi, Chuang
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The present study compared the accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The experimental models were divided into six groups depending on the implant location and the scanning span. Digital impressions were captured using the intraoral optical scanner TRIOS (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). Conventional impressions were taken with the monophase impression material based on addition-cured silicones, Honigum-Mono (DMG, Hamburg, Germany). A high-precision laboratory scanner D900 (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) was used to obtain digital data of resin models and stone casts. Surface tessellation language (STL) datasets from scanner were imported into the analysis software Geomagic Qualify 14 (3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA), and scan body deviations were determined through two-dimensional and three-dimensional analyses. Each scan body was measured five times. The Sidak t test was used to analyze the experimental data. RESULTS: Implant position and scanning distance affected the impression accuracy. For a unilateral arch implant and the mandible models with two implants, no significant difference was observed in the accuracy between the digital and conventional implant impressions on scan bodies; however, the corresponding differences for trans-arch implants and mandible with six implants were extremely significant (P<.001). CONCLUSION: For short-span scanning, the accuracy of digital and conventional implant impressions did not differ significantly. For long-span scanning, the precision of digital impressions was significantly inferior to that of the traditional impressions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9444482
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94444822022-09-13 Comparison of accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions: two and three dimensional evaluations Bi, Chuang Wang, Xingyu Tian, Fangfang Qu, Zhe Zhao, Jiaming J Adv Prosthodont Original Article PURPOSE: The present study compared the accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The experimental models were divided into six groups depending on the implant location and the scanning span. Digital impressions were captured using the intraoral optical scanner TRIOS (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). Conventional impressions were taken with the monophase impression material based on addition-cured silicones, Honigum-Mono (DMG, Hamburg, Germany). A high-precision laboratory scanner D900 (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) was used to obtain digital data of resin models and stone casts. Surface tessellation language (STL) datasets from scanner were imported into the analysis software Geomagic Qualify 14 (3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA), and scan body deviations were determined through two-dimensional and three-dimensional analyses. Each scan body was measured five times. The Sidak t test was used to analyze the experimental data. RESULTS: Implant position and scanning distance affected the impression accuracy. For a unilateral arch implant and the mandible models with two implants, no significant difference was observed in the accuracy between the digital and conventional implant impressions on scan bodies; however, the corresponding differences for trans-arch implants and mandible with six implants were extremely significant (P<.001). CONCLUSION: For short-span scanning, the accuracy of digital and conventional implant impressions did not differ significantly. For long-span scanning, the precision of digital impressions was significantly inferior to that of the traditional impressions. The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2022-08 2022-08-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9444482/ /pubmed/36105881 http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2022.14.4.236 Text en © 2022 The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Bi, Chuang
Wang, Xingyu
Tian, Fangfang
Qu, Zhe
Zhao, Jiaming
Comparison of accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions: two and three dimensional evaluations
title Comparison of accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions: two and three dimensional evaluations
title_full Comparison of accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions: two and three dimensional evaluations
title_fullStr Comparison of accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions: two and three dimensional evaluations
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions: two and three dimensional evaluations
title_short Comparison of accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions: two and three dimensional evaluations
title_sort comparison of accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions: two and three dimensional evaluations
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9444482/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36105881
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2022.14.4.236
work_keys_str_mv AT bichuang comparisonofaccuracybetweendigitalandconventionalimplantimpressionstwoandthreedimensionalevaluations
AT wangxingyu comparisonofaccuracybetweendigitalandconventionalimplantimpressionstwoandthreedimensionalevaluations
AT tianfangfang comparisonofaccuracybetweendigitalandconventionalimplantimpressionstwoandthreedimensionalevaluations
AT quzhe comparisonofaccuracybetweendigitalandconventionalimplantimpressionstwoandthreedimensionalevaluations
AT zhaojiaming comparisonofaccuracybetweendigitalandconventionalimplantimpressionstwoandthreedimensionalevaluations