Kwon, Miran
(Department of Orthodontics, Korea University Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry)
,
Cho, Youngmok
(Department of Mechanical Engineering, Korea University School of Engineering)
,
Kim, Dong-Wook
(Department of Orthodontics, Korea University Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry)
,
Kim, MyungSu
(Department of Orthodontics, Korea University Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry)
,
Kim, Yoon-Ji
(Department of Orthodontics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine)
,
Chang, Minho
(Department of Mechanical Engineering, Korea University School of Engineering)
Objective: To evaluate the trueness and precision of full-arch scans acquired using five intraoral scanners and investigate the factors associated with the dimensional accuracy of the intraoral scan data. Methods: Nine adult participants (mean age, 34.3 ± 8.3 years) were recruited. Four zirconi...
Objective: To evaluate the trueness and precision of full-arch scans acquired using five intraoral scanners and investigate the factors associated with the dimensional accuracy of the intraoral scan data. Methods: Nine adult participants (mean age, 34.3 ± 8.3 years) were recruited. Four zirconium spheres (Ø 6 mm) were bonded to the canines and the molars. Following acquisition of reference scans using an industrial-grade scanner, five intraoral scanners, namely i500, CS3600, Trios 3, iTero, and CEREC Omnicam, were used to scan the arches. Linear distances between the four reference spheres were automatically calculated, and linear mixed model analysis was performed to compare the trueness and precision of the intraoral scan data among the different scanners. Results: The absolute mean trueness and precision values for all intraoral scanners were 76.6 ± 79.3 and 56.6 ± 52.4 ㎛, respectively. The type of scanner and the measured linear distances had significant effects on the accuracy of the intraoral scan data. With regard to trueness, errors in the intermolar dimension and the distance from the canine to the contralateral molar were greater with Omnicam than with the other scanners. With regard to precision, the error in the linear distance from the canine to the molar in the same quadrant was greater with Omnicam and CS3600 than with the other scanners. Conclusions: The dimensional accuracy of intraoral scan data may differ significantly according to the type of scanner, with the amount of error in terms of trueness being clinically significant.
Objective: To evaluate the trueness and precision of full-arch scans acquired using five intraoral scanners and investigate the factors associated with the dimensional accuracy of the intraoral scan data. Methods: Nine adult participants (mean age, 34.3 ± 8.3 years) were recruited. Four zirconium spheres (Ø 6 mm) were bonded to the canines and the molars. Following acquisition of reference scans using an industrial-grade scanner, five intraoral scanners, namely i500, CS3600, Trios 3, iTero, and CEREC Omnicam, were used to scan the arches. Linear distances between the four reference spheres were automatically calculated, and linear mixed model analysis was performed to compare the trueness and precision of the intraoral scan data among the different scanners. Results: The absolute mean trueness and precision values for all intraoral scanners were 76.6 ± 79.3 and 56.6 ± 52.4 ㎛, respectively. The type of scanner and the measured linear distances had significant effects on the accuracy of the intraoral scan data. With regard to trueness, errors in the intermolar dimension and the distance from the canine to the contralateral molar were greater with Omnicam than with the other scanners. With regard to precision, the error in the linear distance from the canine to the molar in the same quadrant was greater with Omnicam and CS3600 than with the other scanners. Conclusions: The dimensional accuracy of intraoral scan data may differ significantly according to the type of scanner, with the amount of error in terms of trueness being clinically significant.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
제안 방법
Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to evalu- ate the in vivo trueness and precision of full-arch scans acquired using five intraoral scanners and an industrial- grade scanner for reference scans. In addition, we aimed to compare the trueness and precision of intra-arch linear dimensions across the canines and molars.
Descriptive statistics of the trueness and precision of the linear measurements derived from the intraoral scans were obtained. Using the absolute errors, linear mixed model analysis was performed to compare the trueness and precision of the intraoral scanners according to the linear distances.
132 for the scanning accuracy of dental chairside and laboratory computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing systems was employed for analysis of trueness and pre- cision. Following random selection of either the maxillary (n = 6) or the mandibular arch (n = 3), zirconium spheres (Ø 6 mm; SBB Tech Co., Gimpo, Korea) were bonded, using flowable composite resin (FiltekTM Z350 XT; 3M Co., St. Paul, MN, USA), to the lingual or palatal surface of the right and left canines and the occlusal surface of the right and left first molars in the selected arch. The four spheres were references for the measurement of linear distances (Figure 1).
Trueness was evaluated by analyz- ing the differences in measured distances between the intraoral and reference scans. Precision was evaluated by analyzing the differences between different pairs of re- peated intraoral scan data for the same participant, with 10 measurements per distance per participant.
대상 데이터
The study sample comprised one woman and eight men with a mean age of 34.3 ± 8.3 years. One partici- pant dropped out after scanning with two scanners (iTero and Omnicam) citing personal reasons.
used to scan the arches: i500 (Medit Corp.), CS3600 (Carestream Health, Rochester, NY, USA), Trios 3 (3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark), iTero (Align Technology, Inc., San Jose, CA, USA), and CEREC Omnicam (Dentsply Sirona, York, PA, USA) (Table 2). After calibration, five scans were obtained with each type of scanner for each participant, resulting in 25 scans per participant.
데이터처리
obtained. Using the absolute errors, linear mixed model analysis was performed to compare the trueness and precision of the intraoral scanners according to the linear distances. Additional factors such as the practi- tioner who performed scanning and the arch (upper vs.
이론/모형
Through the F test, the feasibility of each statistical model with significant factors was evaluated. The Tukey–Kramer test was performed for post hoc analysis. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS software version 9.
Tukey–Kramer test was performed.
참고문헌 (19)
1 Güth JF Keul C Stimmelmayr M Beuer F Edelhoff D 2013 Accuracy of digital models obtained by direct and indirect data capturing Clin Oral Investig 17 1201 8 10.1007/s00784-012-0795-0 22847854
2 Boeddinghaus M Breloer ES Rehmann P Wöstmann B 2015 Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients Clin Oral Investig 19 2027 34 10.1007/s00784-015-1430-7 25693497
3 Berrendero S Salido MP Valverde A Ferreiroa A Pradíes G 2016 Influence of conventional and digital intraoral impressions on the fit of CAD/CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns Clin Oral Investig 20 2403 10 10.1007/s00784-016-1714-6 26800669
4 Atieh MA Ritter AV Ko CC Duqum I 2017 Accuracy evaluation of intraoral optical impressions: a clinical study using a reference appliance J Prosthet Dent 118 400 5 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.10.022 28222869
5 Ender A Mehl A 2013 Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems Int J Comput Dent 16 11 21 23641661
6 Kuhr F Schmidt A Rehmann P Wöstmann B 2016 A new method for assessing the accuracy of full arch impressions in patients J Dent 55 68 74 10.1016/j.jdent.2016.10.002 27717754
7 Rhee YK Huh YH Cho LR Park CJ 2015 Comparison of intraoral scanning and conventional impression techniques using 3-dimensional superimposition J Adv Prosthodont 7 460 7 10.4047/jap.2015.7.6.460 26816576
8 Sousa MV Vasconcelos EC Janson G Garib D Pinzan A 2012 Accuracy and reproducibility of 3-dimensional digital model measurements Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 142 269 73 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.12.028 22858338
10 Li H Lyu P Wang Y Sun Y 2017 Influence of object translucency on the scanning accuracy of a powder-free intraoral scanner: a laboratory study J Prosthet Dent 117 93 101 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.04.008 27460324
11 Goracci C Franchi L Vichi A Ferrari M 2016 Accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of intraoral scanners for full-arch impressions: a systematic review of the clinical evidence Eur J Orthod 38 422 8 10.1093/ejo/cjv077 26487391
12 Ender A Attin T Mehl A 2016 In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods of obtaining complete-arch dental impressions J Prosthet Dent 115 313 20 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.09.011 26548890
13 Flügge TV Schlager S Nelson K Nahles S Metzger MC 2013 Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 144 471 8 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.017 23992820
14 Grünheid T McCarthy SD Larson BE 2014 Clinical use of a direct chairside oral scanner: an assessment of accuracy, time, and patient acceptance Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 146 673 82 10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.07.023 25439218
15 Ender A Mehl A 2013 Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision J Prosthet Dent 109 121 8 10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60028-1 23395338
16 Nedelcu R Olsson P Nyström I Rydén J Thor A 2018 Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: a novel in vivo analysis method J Dent 69 110 8 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.12.006 29246490
17 Müller P Ender A Joda T Katsoulis J 2016 Impact of digital intraoral scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the TRIOS Pod scanner Quintessence Int 47 343 9 10.3290/j.qi.a35524 26824085
18 Oh KC Park JM Moon HS 2020 Effects of scanning strategy and scanner type on the accuracy of intraoral scans: a new approach for assessing the accuracy of scanned data J Prosthodont 29 518 23 10.1111/jopr.13158 32133690
19 Revilla-León M Jiang P Sadeghpour M Piedra-Cascón W Zandinejad A Özcan M 2020 Intraoral digital scans-part 1: influence of ambient scanning light conditions on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of different intraoral scanners J Prosthet Dent 124 372 8 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.003 31864638
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.