The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of the accuracy of digital impressions and traditional impressions: Systematic review

디지털 인상법과 전통적 인상법의 정확도 비교: 체계적 고찰

  • Kim, Kyoung-Rok (Department of Prosthodontics, Gangnam Severance Dental Hospital, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Seo, Kweonsoo (Department of Prosthodontics, Gangnam Severance Dental Hospital, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Kim, Sunjai (Department of Prosthodontics, Gangnam Severance Dental Hospital, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
  • 김경록 (연세대학교 강남세브란스치과병원 치과보철과) ;
  • 서권수 (연세대학교 강남세브란스치과병원 치과보철과) ;
  • 김선재 (연세대학교 강남세브란스치과병원 치과보철과)
  • Received : 2018.02.05
  • Accepted : 2018.05.30
  • Published : 2018.07.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This study systematically examines literatures on the suitability of prostheses and accuracy of obtained impressions to see if digital impressions using intraoral scanners can replace traditional impressions. Materials and methods: A MEDLINE/PubMed search and manual search was performed for studies written in English about accuracy of digital impression published in dental journals from August 1, 1997, to July 31, 2017. Depending on criteria, the data for the selected articles were independently organized into standardized spreadsheets by 2 reviewers. Results: Among the total 35 studies met the inclusion criteria, there were 26 studies comparing the suitability of prostheses, and 9 studies comparing the accuracy of impressions through scan data without prostheses. Most studies used prostheses to compare the accuracy of impression techniques. Conclusion: This review suggests that making single crown or mesio-distally short prostheses with digital impressions is clinically reliable in natural teeth. However, there is still a limit to making mesio-distally long prostheses with digital impressions from the lack of related studies. Digital impression cannot fully replace traditional impressions in implant prostheses yet.

목적: 본 연구는 보철물의 적합 및 인상의 정확성에 관한 문헌들을 체계적으로 고찰하여 구강 내 스캐너를 이용한 디지털 인상법이 전통적인 인상법을 대체할 만한 정확도를 보이는지 알아보고자 한다. 재료 및 방법: 1997년 8월 1일부터 2017년 7월 31일까지 출판된 영어로 쓰여진 연구를 대상으로 디지털 인상법의 정확성에 대한 문헌을 MEDLINE/PubMed 전자 검색 및 수기탐색을 시행하였다. 조건에 따라 선택된 연구의 데이터를 스프레드 시트에 2명의 검토자가 독립적으로 정리하였다. 결과: 총 35개의 연구가 선택되었고, 26개의 연구는 보철물의 적합성을 비교하였고 9개의 연구는 보철물 없이 스캔 데이터를 통해 인상의 정확성을 비교하였다. 대부분의 연구가 보철물을 이용해 인상법의 정확성을 비교하였다. 결론: 본 고찰에 따르면 자연치열에서 디지털 인상법으로 단일관이나 근원심으로 길이가 짧은 보철물을 제작하는 것은 임상적으로 충분히 신뢰할만한 하다. 그러나 디지털 인상법으로 길이가 긴 보철물을 제작하는 것은 연구가 적어 아직 한계가 있다. 임플란트 보철물 제작에 있어서 구내스캐너를 이용한 디지털 인상법으로 전통적인 인상법을 완전히 대체하기는 아직 어렵다.

Keywords

References

  1. Kokubo Y, Ohkubo C, Tsumita M, Miyashita A, Vult von Steyern P, Fukushima S. Clinical marginal and internal gaps of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:526-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01458.x
  2. Belser UC, MacEntee MI, Richter WA. Fit of three porcelainfused-to-metal marginal designs in vivo: a scanning electron microscope study. J Prosthet Dent 1985;53:24-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90058-7
  3. Knoernschild KL, Campbell SD. Periodontal tissue responses after insertion of artiflcial crowns and flxed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:492-8. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2000.110262
  4. Karlsson S. A clinical evaluation of fixed bridges, 10 years following insertion. J Oral Rehabil 1986;13:423-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1986.tb01304.x
  5. Goldman M, Laosonthorn P, White RR. Microleakage-full crowns and the dental pulp. J Endod 1992;18:473-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81345-2
  6. Jacobs MS, Windeler AS. An investigation of dental luting cement solubility as a function of the marginal gap. J Prosthet Dent 1991;65:436-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(91)90239-S
  7. Rekow ED, Harsono M, Janal M, Thompson VP, Zhang G. Factorial analysis of variables influencing stress in all-ceramic crowns. Dent Mater 2006;22:125-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2005.04.010
  8. Alghazzawi TF. Advancements in CAD/CAM technology: Options for practical implementation. J Prosthodont Res 2016;60:72-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2016.01.003
  9. Christensen GJ. Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital or digital plus in-offlce milling. J Am Dent Assoc 2009;140:1301-4. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2009.0054
  10. Ting-Shu S, Jian S. Intraoral digital impression technique: A review. J Prosthodont 2015;24:313-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12218
  11. Christensen GJ. The challenge to conventional impressions. J Am Dent Assoc 2008;139:347-9. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0165
  12. Yun MJ, Jeon YC, Jeong CM, Huh JB. Comparison of the flt of cast gold crowns fabricated from the digital and the conventional impression techniques. J Adv Prosthodont 2017;9:1-13. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.1.1
  13. Rodiger M, Heinitz A, Burgers R, Rinke S. Fitting accuracy of zirconia single crowns produced via digital and conventional impressions-a clinical comparative study. Clin Oral Investig 2017;21:579-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1924-y
  14. Cetik S, Bahrami B, Fossoyeux I, Atash R. Adaptation of zirconia crowns created by conventional versus optical impression: in vitro study. J Adv Prosthodont 2017;9:208-16. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.3.208
  15. Zarauz C, Valverde A, Martinez-Rus F, Hassan B, Pradies G. Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:799-806. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1590-5
  16. Su TS, Sun J. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic flxed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116:362-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.018
  17. Pedroche LO, Bernardes SR, Leao MP, Kintopp CC, Correr GM, Ornaghi BP, Gonzaga CC. Marginal and internal flt of zirconia copings obtained using different digital scanning methods. Braz Oral Res 2016;30:e113.
  18. Kim JH, Jeong JH, Lee JH, Cho HW. Fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated from conventional and digital impressions assessed with micro-CT. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116:551-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.03.028
  19. Dauti R, Cvikl B, Franz A, Schwarze UY, Lilaj B, Rybaczek T, Moritz A. Comparison of marginal flt of cemented zirconia copings manufactured after digital impression with lava C.O.S and conventional impression technique. BMC Oral Health 2016;16:129. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-016-0323-8
  20. Berrendero S, Salido MP, Valverde A, Ferreiroa A, Pradies G. Influence of conventional and digital intraoral impressions on the flt of CAD/CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:2403-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1714-6
  21. Ahrberg D, Lauer HC, Ahrberg M, Weigl P. Evaluation of fit and efficiency of CAD/CAM fabricated all-ceramic restorations based on direct and indirect digitalization: a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:291-300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1504-6
  22. Ueda K, Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Erdelt K, Keul C, Guth JF. Fit of 4-unit FDPs from CoCr and zirconia after conventional and digital impressions. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:283-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1513-5
  23. Pradies G, Zarauz C, Valverde A, Ferreiroa A, Martinezi-Rus F. Clinical evaluation comparing the flt of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions based on wavefront sampling technology. J Dent 2015;43:201-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.12.007
  24. Boeddinghaus M, Breloer ES, Rehmann P, Wostmann B. Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients. Clin Oral Investig 2015;19:2027-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1430-7
  25. Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Denry IL, Thomas GW, Qian F. Internal flt of pressed and computeraided design/computer-aided manufacturing ceramic crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2015;113:304-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.09.015
  26. Alfaro DP, Ruse ND, Carvalho RM, Wyatt CC. Assessment of the Internal Fit of Lithium Disilicate Crowns Using Micro-CT. J Prosthodont 2015;24:381-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12274
  27. Abdel-Azim T, Rogers K, Elathamna E, Zandinejad A, Metz M, Morton D. Comparison of the marginal flt of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners. J Prosthet Dent 2015;114:554-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.04.001
  28. Tidehag P, Ottosson K, Sjogren G. Accuracy of ceramic restorations made using an in-offlce optical scanning technique: an in vitro study. Oper Dent 2014;39:308-16. https://doi.org/10.2341/12-309-L
  29. Svanborg P, Skjerven H, Carlsson P, Eliasson A, Karlsson S, Ortorp A. Marginal and internal flt of cobalt-chromium flxed dental prostheses generated from digital and conventional impressions. Int J Dent 2014;2014:534382.
  30. Ng J, Ruse D, Wyatt C. A comparison of the marginal flt of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:555-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.002
  31. Keul C, Stawarczyk B, Erdelt KJ, Beuer F, Edelhoff D, Guth JF. Fit of 4-unit FDPs made of zirconia and CoCr-alloy after chairside and labside digitalization-a laboratory study. Dent Mater 2014;30:400-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.01.006
  32. Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Denry I, Thomas GW, Qian F. 3D and 2D marginal flt of pressed and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. J Prosthodont 2014;23:610-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12180
  33. An S, Kim S, Choi H, Lee JH, Moon HS. Evaluating the marginal flt of zirconia copings with digital impressions with an intraoral digital scanner. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:1171-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.024
  34. Almeida e Silva JS, Erdelt K, Edelhoff D, Araujo E, Stimmelmayr M, Vieira LC, Guth JF. Marginal and internal flt of fourunit zirconia flxed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques. Clin Oral Investig 2014;18:515-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-0987-2
  35. Abdel-Azim T, Zandinejad A, Elathamna E, Lin W, Morton D. The influence of digital fabrication options on the accuracy of dental implant-based single units and complete-arch frameworks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:1281-8. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3577
  36. Seelbach P, Brueckel C, Wostmann B. Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:1759-64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0864-4
  37. Syrek A, Reich G, Ranftl D, Klein C, Cerny B, Brodesser J. Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling. J Dent 2010;38:553-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.03.015
  38. Chew AA, Esguerra RJ, Teoh KH, Wong KM, Ng SD, Tan KB. Three-dimensional accuracy of digital implant impressions: Effects of different scanners and implant level. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2017;32:70-80. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4942
  39. Basaki K, Alkumru H, De Souza G, Finer Y. Accuracy of digital vs conventional implant impression approach: A threedimensional comparative in vitro analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2017;32:792-9. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.5431
  40. Ajioka H, Kihara H, Odaira C, Kobayashi T, Kondo H. Examination of the position accuracy of implant abutments reproduced by intra-oral optical impression. PLoS One 2016;11:e0164048. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164048
  41. Lee SJ, Betensky RA, Gianneschi GE, Gallucci GO. Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:715-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12375
  42. Ender A, Mehl A. In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence Int 2015;46:9-17.
  43. Cho SH, Schaefer O, Thompson GA, Guentsch A. Comparison of accuracy and reproducibility of casts made by digital and conventional methods. J Prosthet Dent 2015;113:310-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.09.027
  44. Kim SY, Lee SH, Cho SK, Jeong CM, Jeon YC, Yun MJ, Huh JB. Comparison of the accuracy of digitally fabricated polyurethane model and conventional gypsum model. J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6:1-7. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2014.6.1.1
  45. Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent 2013;109:121-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60028-1
  46. Ender A, Mehl A. Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions-an in-vitro study. Int J Comput Dent 2011;14:11-21.
  47. Chochlidakis KM, Papaspyridakos P, Geminiani A, Chen CJ, Feng IJ, Ercoli C. Digital versus conventional impressions for flxed prosthodontics: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116:184-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.017
  48. Jorgensen KD, Esbensen AL. The relationship between the fllm thickness of zinc phosphate cement and the retention of veneer crowns. Acta Odontol Scand 1968;26:169-75. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016356809026130
  49. Shimizu S, Shinya A, Kuroda S, Gomi H. The accuracy of the CAD system using intraoral and extraoral scanners for designing of flxed dental prostheses. Dent Mater J 2017;36:402-7. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2016-326
  50. Hwang YC, Park YS, Kim HK, Hong YS, Ahn JS, Ryu JJ. The evaluation of working casts prepared from digital impressions. Oper Dent 2013;38:655-62. https://doi.org/10.2341/12-352-L

Cited by

  1. 단일 수복물과 3본 고정성 수복물 지대치 모델에서 삼차원 분석을 통한 구강 스캐너의 정확도 비교 vol.57, pp.2, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2019.57.2.102