선택한 단어 수는 입니다.
최소 단어 이상 선택하여야 합니다.
최소 단어 이상 선택하여야 합니다.
선택한 단어 수는 30입니다.
최대 10 단어까지만 선택 가능합니다.
최대 10 단어까지만 선택 가능합니다.
가설 설정
- 2. The accuracy of encoded healing abutment and scan body impression method was not significantly different.
제안 방법
- The abutment to be secured into the master model was designed with 5.0 mm diameter, 3.0 mm cuff and 5.0 mm height using CAD software (Dental system™, 3shape, Copenhagen, Denmark).
- 20 Therefore, it is necessary to study the accuracy of the impression method using the encoded healing abutment. In this study, the purpose was to compare the accuracy of three different implant placement angles with the encoded healing abutment, scan body, and pick-up impression coping impression method.
- 0 mm height using CAD software (Dental system™, 3shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). The abutment was milled using a CAM machine (Plus Mill BX4, Dental Plus, Seoul, Korea) and then, abutment was sandblasted to improve the accuracy of scanning. Fig.
- The root mean square (RMS) value was calculated to compare the discrepancies between reference and experimental abutments. In order to find the difference according to the impression method, RMS values were measured in three abutments in group P, S and E (Fig. 5), and each group was divided into three subgroups (Table 1). The RMS values were compared in the abutments of PM1 (0°) for subgroup a0, PM2 (10°) for subgroup a1, and M2 (20°) for subgroup a2.
- In this study to compare the accuracy with situation simulating more clinical, the abutment was designed and milled with CAD/CAM system and RMS of three-dimensional error value of the abutment part was measured and compared.
- The purpose of this study is to compare the accuracy of the impression method using the encoded healing abutment with the traditional open-tray method and the conventional digital impression scan body method and to determine whether the angulation of implant affects the accuracy of the impression. In 2006, Grossmann et al.
- In this study, the accuracies of three types of impression methods (encoded healing abutment, scan body, pick-up coping) were compared at various implant angles and the following conclusions were drawn.
대상 데이터
- This process was repeated 15 times and a new pick-up impression coping and individual tray were used. Models were fabricated with the type IV dental stone (Fuji rock EP, GC Corp., Tokyo, Japan), and carefully trimmed to minimize discrepancies from the master model.
데이터처리
- One-way ANOVA test was performed to find out the difference between impression methods, and result of the test showed statistically significant (P < 0.05, Table 3, 4), therefore Dunnett T3 test was performed for post-hoc analysis.
- Kolmogorov-Smirnov analysis and Shapiro-Wilk analysis were performed for the regularity test. One-way ANOVA test was performed and the Dunnett T3 test was performed for post-analysis. The Jonckheere-Terpstra test was used to examine the correlation between the angulation of the implant and the error (P = 0.
이론/모형
- , Chicago, USA). Kolmogorov-Smirnov analysis and Shapiro-Wilk analysis were performed for the regularity test. One-way ANOVA test was performed and the Dunnett T3 test was performed for post-analysis.
- One-way ANOVA test was performed and the Dunnett T3 test was performed for post-analysis. The Jonckheere-Terpstra test was used to examine the correlation between the angulation of the implant and the error (P = 0.05).
성능/효과
- The result of Jonckheere-Terpstra test for the correlation of the RMS values according to the angulation of the implant showed a correlation in group E (P < 0.05), which RMS value was 33.83 ± 2.88 μm (Ea0), 39.69 ± 4.31 μm (Ea1) and 37.62 ± 4.69 μm (Ea2).
- 1. The pick-up impression coping method was significantly more accurate than the encoded healing abutment and scan body impression method (P < 0.05).
- 3. When using the encoded healing abutment impression method, the accuracy of impression significantly decreased as the angulation of implant was increased. Scan body and pick-up impression coping method, however, did not show a statistically significant correlation.
- The impression method using the encoded healing abutment showed a higher RMS value than the pick-up impression coping method (P < 0.05) regardless of the angle of implant and conventional pick-up impression coping method showed the highest accuracy.
후속연구
- However, Assunaco et al. reported that the error was increased with the inclination of the implant, and a larger error was shown with the angulation of 25° implant.11,29 Therefore, according to the results of present study, it is difficult to conclude that the pick-up impression method and the scan body impression method are free of implant angulation, and further studies on the implants with larger angulation seem to be needed.
- 37,40 However, because the encoded healing abutment has both gingival height and diameter information, it is possible to fabricate the abutment which is same with the upper gingival shape of the implant. Therefore, the use of an encoded healing abutment is likely to increase if further studies are performed and the disadvantages are supplemented.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.