Journal of Technologic Dentistry (대한치과기공학회지)

Korean Academy of Dental Technology (대한치과기공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of reproducibility of prepared tooth impression scanning utilized with white and blue light scanners

백색광과 청색광 스캐너를 이용한 지대치 인상체 스캐닝의 반복재현성 비교

  • Jeon, Jin-Hun (Department of Dental Laboratory Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Sung, Hwan-Kyung (Department of Dental Technology, Dongnam Health University) ;
  • Min, Byung-Kuk (Department of Dental Technology, Dongnam Health University) ;
  • Hwang, Jae-Sun (Department of Dental Technology, Dongnam Health University) ;
  • Kim, Ji-Hwan (Department of Dental Laboratory Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Woong-Chul (Department of Dental Laboratory Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University)
  • 전진훈 (고려대학교 대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공) ;
  • 성환경 (동남보건대학교 치기공과) ;
  • 민병국 (동남보건대학교 치기공과) ;
  • 황재선 (동남보건대학교 치기공과) ;
  • 김지환 (고려대학교 대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공) ;
  • 김웅철 (고려대학교 대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공)
  • Received : 2015.10.29
  • Accepted : 2015.12.11
  • Published : 2015.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study compared of reproducibility of prepared tooth impression scanning utilized with white and blue light scanners. Methods: To evaluate reproducibility with white and blue light scanners, the impression of premolar were rotated by $10^{\circ}{\sim}20^{\circ}$ and scanned. These data were compared with the first 3-D data (STL file), and the error sizes were measured (n=5). Independent t test was used to evaluation the reproducibility of impression of premolar with white versus blue light scanners through discrepancies of mean, RMS (${\alpha}=0.05$). Results: Discrepancies of mean with regard to reproducibility were $11.2{\mu}m$, $5.8{\mu}m$, respectively, with white and blue light scanners (p<0.047). And discrepancies of RMS with regard to reproducibility were $33.4{\mu}m$, $18.8{\mu}m$, respectively, with white and blue light scanners (p<0.045). Conclusion: Our results indicate a good reproducibility of prepared tooth impression digitized with blue light scanner more than that with white light scanner.

Keywords

References

  1. Alikhasi M, Monzavi A, Bassir SH, Naini RB, Khosronedjad N, Keshavarz S. A comparison of precision of fit, rotational freedom, and torque loss with copy-milled zirconia and prefabricated titanium abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 28(4), 996-1002, 2013. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2937
  2. Chang MH, Park SC. Automated scanning of dental impressions. Computer-Aided Design, 41(2), 404-411, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2009.02.004
  3. Cho SH, Schaefer O, Thompson GA, Guentsch A. Comparison of accuracy and reproducibility of casts made by digital and conventional methods. J Prosthet Dent, 113, 310-315, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.09.027
  4. Codari M, Pucciarelli V, Pisoni L, Sforza C. Laser scanner compared with stereophotogrammetry for measurements of area on nasal plaster casts. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, Jun 2, 2015.
  5. Dahlmo KI, Andersson M, Gellerstedt M, Karlsson S. On a new method to assess the accuracy of a CAD program. Int J Prosthodont, 14, 276-283, 2001.
  6. Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent, 109(2), 121-128, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60028-1
  7. Flugge TV, Schlager S, Nelson K, Nahles S, Metzger MC. Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 144(3), 471-478, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.017
  8. Hayashi K, Sachdeva AU, Saitoh S, Lee SP, Kubota T, Mizoguchi I. Assessment of the accuracy and reliability of new 3-dimensional scanning devices. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 144(4), 619-625, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.021
  9. Jeon JH, Choi BY, Kim CM, Kim JH, Kim HY, Kim WC. Three-dimensional evaluation of the repeatability of scanned conventional impressions of prepared teeth generated with white-and blue-light scanners. J Prosthet Dent, 114(4), 549-553, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.04.019
  10. Jeon JH, Kim HY, Kim JH, Kim WC. Accuracy of 3D white light scanning of abutment teeth impressions: evaluation of trueness and precision. J Adv Prosthodont, 6(6), 468-473, 2014. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2014.6.6.468
  11. Logozzo S, Zanetti EM, Franceschini G, Kilpela A, Makynen A. Recent advances in dental optics -Part I: 3D intraoral scanners for restorative dentistry. Opt Lasers Eng, 54, 203-221, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlaseng.2013.07.017
  12. Luthardt RG, Loos R, Quaas S. Accuracy of intraoral data acquisition in comparison to the conventional impression. Int J Comput Dent, 8(4), 283-294, 2005.
  13. Naidu D, Freer TJ. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of the iOC intraoral scanner: a comparison of tooth widths and Bolton ratios. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 144(2), 304-310, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.011
  14. Technical Committee ISO/TC 106, Dentistry, Subcommittee SC 9, Dental CAD/CAM Systems. ISO12836: 2012(E) Dentistry-digitizing devices for CAD/CAM systems for indirect dental restorations-test methods for assessing. Switzerland, International Organization for Standarization, 17, 2012.
  15. Trifkovic B, Budak I, Todorovic A, Vukelic D, Lazic V, Puskar T. Comparative analysis on measuring performances of dental intraoral and extraoral optical 3D digitization systems. Measurement, 47, 45-53, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2013.08.051

Cited by

  1. 치과용 모형 스캐너의 지대치 중첩 과정이 최종 가상 모형에 미치는 영향 vol.57, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2019.57.3.203