The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

  • 제11권3호
  • /
  • Pages.179-186
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 2005-7806(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-7814(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of different impression techniques for edentulous jaws using three-dimensional analysis

  • Jung, Sua (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Park, Chan (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Yang, Hong-So (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Lim, Hyun-Pil (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Yun, Kwi-Dug (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Ying, Zhai (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Park, Sang-Won (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University)
  • 투고 : 2018.11.12
  • 심사 : 2019.04.09
  • 발행 : 2019.06.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study was to compare two novel impression methods and a conventional impression method for edentulous jaws using 3-dimensional (3D) analysis software. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Five edentulous patients (four men and one woman; mean age: 62.7 years) were included. Three impression techniques were used: conventional impression method (CI; control), simple modified closed-mouth impression method with a novel tray (SI), and digital impression method using an intraoral scanner (DI). Subsequently, a gypsum model was made, scanned, and superimposed using 3D analysis software. Mean area displacement was measured using CI method to evaluate differences in the impression surfaces as compared to those values obtained using SI and DI methods. The values were confirmed at two to five areas to determine the differences. CI and SI were compared at all areas, while CI and DI were compared at the supporting areas. Kruskal-Wallis test was performed for all data. Statistical significance was considered at P value <.05. RESULTS. In the comparison of the CI and SI methods, the greatest difference was observed in the mandibular vestibule without statistical significance (P>.05); the difference was < 0.14 mm in the maxilla. The difference in the edentulous supporting areas between the CI and DI methods was not significant (P>.05). CONCLUSION. The CI, SI, and DI methods were effective in making impressions of the supporting areas in edentulous patients. The SI method showed clinically applicability.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. Br Dent J 2008;204:505-11. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2008.350
  2. Zandinejad A, Lin WS, Atarodi M, Abdel-Azim T, Metz MJ, Morton D. Digital workflow for virtually designing and milling ceramic lithium disilicate veneers: a clinical report. Oper Dent 2015;40:241-6. https://doi.org/10.2341/13-291-S
  3. Wee AG, Lindsey DT, Kuo S, Johnston WM. Color accuracy of commercial digital cameras for use in dentistry. Dent Mater 2006;22:553-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2005.05.011
  4. Brennan J. An introduction to digital radiography in dentistry. J Orthod 2002;29:66-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/29.1.66
  5. Koch GK, Gallucci GO, Lee SJ. Accuracy in the digital workflow: From data acquisition to the digitally milled cast. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:749-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.004
  6. Neumeier TT, Neumeier H. Digital immediate dentures treatment: A clinical report of two patients. J Prosthet Dent 2016; 116:314-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.010
  7. Alhassani AA, AlGhamdi AS. Inferior alveolar nerve injury in implant dentistry: diagnosis, causes, prevention, and management. J Oral Implantol 2010;36:401-7. https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-09-00059
  8. Wenzel A. A review of dentists' use of digital radiography and caries diagnosis with digital systems. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2006;35:307-14. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/64693712
  9. Brawek PK, Wolfart S, Endres L, Kirsten A, Reich S. The clinical accuracy of single crowns exclusively fabricated by digital workflow-the comparison of two systems. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:2119-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-0923-5
  10. Payer M, Arnetzl V, Kirmeier R, Koller M, Arnetzl G, Jakse N. Immediate provisional restoration of single-piece zirconia implants: a prospective case series - results after 24 months of clinical function. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013;24:569-75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02425.x
  11. Joo HS, Park SW, Yun KD, Lim HP. Complete-mouth rehabilitation using a 3D printing technique and the CAD/CAM double scanning method: A clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116:3-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.007
  12. Ohkubo C, Shimpo H, Tokue A, Park EJ, Kim TH. Complete denture fabrication using piezography and CAD-CAM: A clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2018;119:334-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.04.013
  13. Wimmer T, Gallus K, Eichberger M, Stawarczyk B. Complete denture fabrication supported by CAD/CAM. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:541-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.10.016
  14. McLaughlin JB, Ramos V Jr. Complete denture fabrication with CAD/CAM record bases. J Prosthet Dent 2015;114:493-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.04.017
  15. AlHelal A, AlRumaih HS, Kattadiyil MT, Baba NZ, Goodacre CJ. Comparison of retention between maxillary milled and conventional denture bases: A clinical study. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:233-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.08.007
  16. Felton DA, Cooper LF, Scurria MS. Predictable impression procedures for complete dentures. Dent Clin North Am 1996;40:39-51.
  17. Collett HA. Final impressions for complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1970;23:250-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(70)90180-0
  18. Goodacre BJ, Goodacre CJ, Baba NZ, Kattadiyil MT. Comparison of denture tooth movement between CADCAM and conventional fabrication techniques. J Prosthet Dent 2018;119:108-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.02.009
  19. Schweiger J, Guth JF, Edelhoff D, Stumbaum J. Virtual evaluation for CAD-CAM-fabricated complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:28-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.05.015
  20. Jacob RF. The traditional therapeutic paradigm: complete denture therapy. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79:6-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70186-6
  21. Ceruti P, Mobilio N, Bellia E, Borracchini A, Catapano S, Gassino G. Simplified edentulous treatment: A multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the timing and clinical outcomes of the technique. J Prosthet Dent 2017;118:462-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.01.024
  22. Kattadiyil MT, AlHelal A, Goodacre BJ. Clinical complications and quality assessments with computer-engineered complete dentures: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:721-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.12.006
  23. Fang JH, An X, Jeong SM, Choi BH. Development of complete dentures based on digital intraoral impressions-Case report. J Prosthodont Res 2018;62:116-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2017.05.005
  24. Alsharbaty MHM, Alikhasi M, Zarrati S, Shamshiri AR. A clinical comparative study of 3-dimensional accuracy between digital and conventional implant impression techniques. J Prosthodont 2019;28:e902-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12764
  25. Gan N, Xiong Y, Jiao T. Accuracy of intraoral digital impressions for whole upper jaws, including full dentitions and palatal soft tissues. PLoS One 2016;11:e0158800. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158800
  26. Sharma S, Agarwal S, Sharma D, Kumar S, Glodha N. Impression; Digital vs. conventional: A review. Ann Dent Spec 2014;2:9-10.
  27. Birnbaum NS, Aaronson HB. Dental impressions using 3D digital scanners: virtual becomes reality. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2008;29:494, 496, 498-505.
  28. Heo YR, Kim HJ, Son MK, Chung CH. Contour of lingual surface in lower complete denture formed by polished surface impression. J Adv Prosthodont 2016;8:472-8. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.6.472
  29. Park C, Yang HS, Lim HP, Yun KD, Oh GJ, Park SW. A new fast and simple border molding process for complete dentures using a compound stick gun. Int J Prosthodont 2016;29: 559-60.
  30. Dawson PE. Evaluation, diagnosis and treatment of occlusal problems. 3rd ed. St. Louis; Mosby; 1989. p. 41-7.
  31. Collett HA. Complete denture impressions. J Prosthet Dent 1965;15:603-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(65)90030-2
  32. Matsuda T, Goto T, Kurahashi K, Kashiwabara T, Watanabe M, Tomotake Y, Nagao K, Ichikawa T. Digital assessment of preliminary impression accuracy for edentulous jaws: Comparisons of 3-dimensional surfaces between study and working casts. J Prosthodont Res 2016;60:206-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2015.12.007
  33. Yoon HI, Hwang HJ, Ohkubo C, Han JS, Park EJ. Evaluation of the trueness and tissue surface adaptation of CAD-CAM mandibular denture bases manufactured using digital light processing. J Prosthet Dent 2018;120:919-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.01.027
  34. Pinelli LA, Fais LM, Ricci WA, Reis JM. In vitro comparisons of casting retention on implant abutments among commercially available and experimental castor oil-containing dental luting agents. J Prosthet Dent 2013;109:319-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60308-X
  35. Koller MM, Merlini L, Spandre G, Palla S. A comparative study of two methods for the orientation of the occlusal plane and the determination of the vertical dimension of occlusion in edentulous patients. J Oral Rehabil 1992;19:413-25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1992.tb01583.x
  36. Kawai Y, Murakami H, Shariati B, Klemetti E, Blomfield JV, Billette L, Lund JP, Feine JS. Do traditional techniques produce better conventional complete dentures than simplified techniques? J Dent 2005;33:659-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2005.01.005
  37. Chaware SH, Fernandes F. Tissue stress evaluation at border seal area using patient-manipulated custom tray-modified closed-mouth functional technique for flat mandibular ridges. J Int Oral Health 2018;10:77-82. https://doi.org/10.4103/jioh.jioh_1_18
  38. Azzam MK, Yurkstas AA, Kronman J. The sublingual crescent extension and its relation to the stability and retention of mandibular complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:205-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90454-I
  39. Kim JE, Amelya A, Shin Y, Shim JS. Accuracy of intraoral digital impressions using an artificial landmark. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:755-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.09.016
  40. 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 2014;54:203-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlaseng.2013.07.017
  41. Patzelt SB, Bishti S, Stampf S, Att W. Accuracy of computeraided design/computer-aided manufacturing-generated dental casts based on intraoral scanner data. J Am Dent Assoc 2014;145:1133-40. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.2014.87
  42. 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 2013;144:471-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.017
  43. 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
  44. Patzelt SB, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S, Strub JR, Att W. Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clin Oral Investig 2014;18:1687-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-1132-y

피인용 문헌

  1. Applying intraoral scanner to residual ridge in edentulous regions: in vitro evaluation of inter-operator validity to confirm trueness vol.19, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-019-0918-y
  2. Accuracy of Five Intraoral Scanners and Two Laboratory Scanners for a Complete Arch: A Comparative In Vitro Study vol.10, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/app10010074
  3. Evaluation of functional suitable digital complete denture system based on 3D printing technology vol.13, pp.6, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2021.13.6.361
  4. Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners for Recording the Denture Bearing Areas: A Systematic Review vol.30, pp.6, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13345
  5. A Comparison of Full Arch Trueness and Precision of Nine Intra-Oral Digital Scanners and Four Lab Digital Scanners vol.9, pp.7, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/dj9070075
  6. Clinical Applications of Intraoral Scanning in Removable Prosthodontics: A Literature Review vol.30, pp.9, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13395