두 가지 CAD software의 맞춤형 지대주 디자인과 출력물 일치도 비교 Comparative study of two CAD software programs on consistency between custom abutment design and the output원문보기
목적: 두 가지 CAD software에서 각 software의 맞춤형 지대주 디자인과 출력물의 일치도를 비교 평가한다. 연구 재료 및 방법: 3Shape Dental System과Delta9 CAD 소프트웨어를 이용하여 임플란트 식립 석고모델에 맞춤형 지대주를 디자인하였다(CRM STL file).디자인한 지대주를 밀링 한 후, 접촉식 방식으로 스캔하고(Test STL file), Inspection 소프트웨어에서 각 지대주의 Test STL file과 CRM STL file을 중첩하여 오차값을 측정하였다. 결과: 시편의 전체 스캔 오차 비교와 축면 경사각에 따른 축면부위 오차비교에서 Delta9이 더 나은 밀링 재현성을 보였다(P < .05). 마진설정 시, 반경 0.9 mm에서 Delta9의 디자인과 출력물의 일치도가 더 우수했다(P < .05). 반면, Anti-rotation 형태 부여에 따른 유의할 만한 차이는 없었다. 부위별 오차 값 누적 비교에서는 Delta9이 대부분의 시편에서 더 작은 오차 값을 보였다(P < .05). 결론: Delta9이 대부분의 디자인 설정 환경에서 3Shape보다 더 작은 오차 값을 보였다. 이는 Delta9을 사용했을 때, 계획된 디자인과 출력물의 일치도가 3Shape과 유사하거나 더 좋은 출력물을 얻을 수 있음을 의미한다.
목적: 두 가지 CAD software에서 각 software의 맞춤형 지대주 디자인과 출력물의 일치도를 비교 평가한다. 연구 재료 및 방법: 3Shape Dental System과Delta9 CAD 소프트웨어를 이용하여 임플란트 식립 석고모델에 맞춤형 지대주를 디자인하였다(CRM STL file).디자인한 지대주를 밀링 한 후, 접촉식 방식으로 스캔하고(Test STL file), Inspection 소프트웨어에서 각 지대주의 Test STL file과 CRM STL file을 중첩하여 오차값을 측정하였다. 결과: 시편의 전체 스캔 오차 비교와 축면 경사각에 따른 축면부위 오차비교에서 Delta9이 더 나은 밀링 재현성을 보였다(P < .05). 마진설정 시, 반경 0.9 mm에서 Delta9의 디자인과 출력물의 일치도가 더 우수했다(P < .05). 반면, Anti-rotation 형태 부여에 따른 유의할 만한 차이는 없었다. 부위별 오차 값 누적 비교에서는 Delta9이 대부분의 시편에서 더 작은 오차 값을 보였다(P < .05). 결론: Delta9이 대부분의 디자인 설정 환경에서 3Shape보다 더 작은 오차 값을 보였다. 이는 Delta9을 사용했을 때, 계획된 디자인과 출력물의 일치도가 3Shape과 유사하거나 더 좋은 출력물을 얻을 수 있음을 의미한다.
Purpose: This study was aimed to compare the consistency between the custom abutment design and the output in two CAD software programs. Materials and Methods: Customized abutments were designed by using 3Shape Dental System CAD software and Delta9 CAD software on a plaster model with implants (CRM ...
Purpose: This study was aimed to compare the consistency between the custom abutment design and the output in two CAD software programs. Materials and Methods: Customized abutments were designed by using 3Shape Dental System CAD software and Delta9 CAD software on a plaster model with implants (CRM STL file). After milling of the designed abutments, the abutments were scanned with a contact method scanner (Test STL file). We overlaid the Test STL file with each CRM STL file by using inspection software, and then compared the milling reproducibility by measuring the output error of the specimens from each CAD software program. Results: The Delta9 showed better milling reproducibility than 3Shape when comparing the milling errors obtained with a full scan of all specimens (P < .05) and also when comparing the axial wall region specifically according to the axial angle. With 0.9 mm marginal radius, the Delta9 showed better consistency between the design and the output than 3Shape (P < .05). While, anti-rotation form had no significant difference in error between the two systems. When cumulative errors were compared, the Delta9 showed better milling reproducibility in almost cases (P < .05). Conclusion: Delta9 showed a significantly smaller error for most of the abutment design options. This means that it is possible to facilitate generation of printouts with reliable reproducibility and high precision with respect to the planned design.
Purpose: This study was aimed to compare the consistency between the custom abutment design and the output in two CAD software programs. Materials and Methods: Customized abutments were designed by using 3Shape Dental System CAD software and Delta9 CAD software on a plaster model with implants (CRM STL file). After milling of the designed abutments, the abutments were scanned with a contact method scanner (Test STL file). We overlaid the Test STL file with each CRM STL file by using inspection software, and then compared the milling reproducibility by measuring the output error of the specimens from each CAD software program. Results: The Delta9 showed better milling reproducibility than 3Shape when comparing the milling errors obtained with a full scan of all specimens (P < .05) and also when comparing the axial wall region specifically according to the axial angle. With 0.9 mm marginal radius, the Delta9 showed better consistency between the design and the output than 3Shape (P < .05). While, anti-rotation form had no significant difference in error between the two systems. When cumulative errors were compared, the Delta9 showed better milling reproducibility in almost cases (P < .05). Conclusion: Delta9 showed a significantly smaller error for most of the abutment design options. This means that it is possible to facilitate generation of printouts with reliable reproducibility and high precision with respect to the planned design.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
문제 정의
In this study, we evaluated two recent CAD software programs for comparing their reproducibility of the customized abutment designed for various clinical conditions.
The object of this study was to verify the function of the two popular CAD software programs through evaluation of the milling reproducibility of the customized abutment designed by clinicians. For the Delta9, it showed a relatively smaller error value than that of 3Shape.
Firstly, since the design of the custom abutment was different due to the differences in the set range of the tools provided in each experimental CAD software program, it was not possible to make a through comparison of the milling error values between the two CAD software programs for each specimen. Therefore, we tried to interpret the data with a focus on qualitative analysis.
제안 방법
Millin g process was done in accordance with CRM STL files (Delta9 (C), 3Shape Dental System (D)). C and D were scanned by using contact type scanner and the scanned data (Test STL file) were overlaid with each CRM STL file to do 3D analysis (Delta9 (E), 3Shape Dental System (F)).
In addition, we compared the differences in specific regions by performing local scoping separately to investigate the partial error range in three areas of the axial wall, the margin, and the anti-rotation form.
In order to investigate the difference in error sensitivity between CAD software programs according to the partial design setting of the abutment, the error was divided into three parts: axial wall, margin, and anti-rotation form. When we compared the error values of the axial wall according to the A group except for T36A6, the smaller the implant diameter of the area to be restored, the more significant the difference between the two CAD software programs was.
In this study, abutment whole-body superposition and abutment partial region superposition were performed separately according to the design conditions by using the above-mentioned method. The milling reproducibility of the two CAD software programs was evaluated by comparing the measured milling error values.
In this study, the design options are consists of three categories; axial wall angle, margin radius, anti-rotation form. Each options were applied to the custom abutment for 4 regions; mandibular incisor (T31), maxillary canine (T13), maxillary premolar (T15) and mandibular molar (T36).
In this study, we used a contact method scanner to reduce the thickness error due to the use of powder during scanning and to obtain the most accurate image. The contact type scanner used in the experiment scans the entire surface of the abutment by raising a ruby ball with a radius of 0.
In actual clinical practice (except in special circumstances), it is the axial wall angle that is the most frequently designated as the design setting value directly by the clinician. That is why we classified and compared the errors according to the A group to investigate the effect of axial wall angle on the milling error. Delta9 showed significantly better reproducibility regardless of axial wall angle, except in the A6 group.
Finally, the error values were presented by overlaps between the CRM STL file and the Test STL file, and the tendency was analyzed. These are unavoidable errors that were measured during the course of the experiment: errors in designing, milling bur wear, errors in generating STL file transformation, actual errors when nesting two STL files, as well as errors due to insecurity in array. The effect of these factors on the experimental results cannot be ruled out.
It was divided into two groups: the set group (Y) and the unset group (N). Twelve specimens were designed for each tooth with different set values (axial wall angle, margin radius, anti-rotation form) for all 4 restorations. The designed specimens were labeled TxAyRzY or TxAyRzN.
Using the data obtained by scanning (FREEDOM HD, DOF, Seoul, Korea) the working cast, customized abutments were designed for the right maxillary first premolar, right maxillary canine, left mandibular first molar and left mandibular incisors by using 3Shape Dental System CAD software (3Shape Dental System, Copenhagen, Denmark) and Delta9 CAD software (Delta9, Daesung, Seoul, Korea). In order to minimize deviation of the design of each specimen, two experimenters were assigned to each CAD software program.
대상 데이터
The designed specimens were labeled TxAyRzY or TxAyRzN. In this paper, we designed 96 abutments for 48 scenarios, using both the Delta9 and 3Shape Dental System (Table 1).
Twelve specimens were designed for each tooth with different set values (axial wall angle, margin radius, anti-rotation form) for all 4 restorations. The designed specimens were labeled TxAyRzY or TxAyRzN. In this paper, we designed 96 abutments for 48 scenarios, using both the Delta9 and 3Shape Dental System (Table 1).
데이터처리
The Mann-Whitney U test was performed to compare differences in anti-rotation form formation and margin curvature in each CAD software program. The Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to evaluate the difference over the upper abutment angle. Post analysis was performed through pairwise comparisons.
, Armonk, USA). The Mann-Whitney U test was performed to compare differences in anti-rotation form formation and margin curvature in each CAD software program. The Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to evaluate the difference over the upper abutment angle.
In this study, abutment whole-body superposition and abutment partial region superposition were performed separately according to the design conditions by using the above-mentioned method. The milling reproducibility of the two CAD software programs was evaluated by comparing the measured milling error values.
성능/효과
Considering many papers that show that the formation of the anti-rotation form is a necessary factor to improve the retention of the prosthesis and the error value in their studies is in a clinically acceptable range, the use of anti-form rotation design in the CAD software programs in this study can be considered acceptable. Sahu et al.
후속연구
group was not significantly different between the two systems under all conditions. Further research is needed to determine whether the effects of design, implant area, and height are offset and minimized when working on the premolar site. On the other hand, Delta9 software shows higher milling error values than other parts in all of the same axial wall angle conditions in the abutment design of the premolar region.
On the other hand, Delta9 software shows higher milling error values than other parts in all of the same axial wall angle conditions in the abutment design of the premolar region. It should be supplemented with further research on whether there is a site-specific error in the software programs.
참고문헌 (21)
Kim JW, Heo YR, Kim HJ, Chung CH. A comparative study on the fit and screw joint stability of ready-made abutment and CAD-CAM custommade abutment. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2013;51:276-83.
Thulasidas S, Givan DA, Lemons JE, O'Neal SJ, Ramp LC, Liu PR. Influence of implant angulation on the fracture resistance of zirconia abutments. J Prosthodont 2015;24:127-35.
Corazza PH, Feitosa SA, Borges AL, Della Bona A. Influence of convergence angle of tooth preparation on the fracture resistance of Y-TZP-based allceramic restorations. Dent Mater 2013;29:339-47.
Yamanishi Y, Yamaguchi S, Imazato S, Nakano T, Yatani H. Effects of the implant design on periimplant bone stress and abutment micromovement: three-dimensional finite element analysis of original computer-aided design models. J Periodontol 2014;85:e333-8.
Komine F, Iwai T, Kobayashi K, Matsumura H. Marginal and internal adaptation of zirconium dioxide ceramic copings and crowns with different finish line designs. Dent Mater J 2007;26:659-64.
Beuer F, Aggstaller H, Edelhoff D, Gernet W. Effect of preparation design on the fracture resistance of zirconia crown copings. Dent Mater J 2008;27:362-7.
Kim CM, Jeon JH, Lee JJ, Kim JH, Kim WC. Precision evaluation of crown prosthesis manufactured by two bur and three bur. J Korean Acad Dent Tech 2016;38:57-62.
Schaefer O, Watts DC, Sigusch BW, Kuepper H, Guentsch A. Marginal and internal fit of pressed lithium disilicate partial crowns in vitro: a three-dimensional analysis of accuracy and reproducibility. Dent Mater 2012;28:320-6.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO-12836:2015. Dentistry - digitizing devices for CAD/CAM systems for indirect dental restorations - Test methods for assessing accuracy. Available from: https://www.iso.org/standard/68414.html (updated 2018 Sep 12).
Lee GT, Kim JH, Kim WC, Kim JH. Three-dimensional evaluation on the repeatability and reproducibility of dental scanner-based digital models. J Korean Acad Dent Tech 2012;34:213-20.
Persson A, Andersson M, Oden A, Sandborgh-Englund G. A three-dimensional evaluation of a laser scanner and a touch-probe scanner. J Prosthet Dent 2006;95:194-200.
Sahu N, Lakshmi N, Azhagarasan NS, Agnihotri Y, Rajan M, Hariharan R. Comparison of the effect of implant abutment surface modifications on retention of implant-supported restoration with a polymer based cement. J Clin Diagn Res 2014;8:239-42.
Enkling N, Ueda T, Gholami H, Bayer S, Katsoulis J, Mericske-Stern R. Precision of fit and retention force of cast non-precious-crowns on standard titanium implant-abutment with different design and height. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:451-7.
Huh JB, Shim JS. The factors caused errors in the production process of CAD/CAM prosthesis based on experience. J Korean Dent Assoc 2014;52:332-45.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.