The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

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

DOI QR Code

Effect of the volumetric dimensions of a complete arch on the accuracy of scanners

  • Kim, Min-Kyu (Department of Dental Science, Graduate School, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Son, KeunBaDa (Advanced Dental Device Development Institute (A3DI), Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Yu, Beom-Young (Advanced Dental Device Development Institute (A3DI), Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Lee, Kyu-Bok (Department of Dental Science, Graduate School, Kyungpook National University)
  • Received : 2020.06.10
  • Accepted : 2020.12.07
  • Published : 2020.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. The present study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of a desktop scanner and intraoral scanners based on the volumetric dimensions of a complete arch. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Seven reference models were fabricated based on the volumetric dimensions of complete arch (70%, 80%, 90%, 100%, 110%, 120%, and 130%). The reference models were digitized using an industrial scanner (Solutionix C500; MEDIT) for the fabrication of a computer-aided design (CAD) reference model (CRM). The reference models were digitized using three intraoral scanners (CS3600, Trios3, and i500) and one desktop scanner (E1) to fabricate a CAD test model (CTM). CRM and CTM were then superimposed using inspection software, and 3D analysis was conducted. For statistical analysis, one-way analysis of variance was used to verify the difference in accuracy based on the volumetric dimensions of the complete arch and the accuracy based on the scanners, and the differences among the groups were analyzed using the Tukey HSD test as a post-hoc test (α=.05). RESULTS. The three different scanners showed a significant difference in accuracy based on the volumetric dimensions of the complete arch (P<.05), but the desktop scanner did not show a significant difference in accuracy based on the volumetric dimensions of the complete arch (P=.808). CONCLUSION. The accuracy of the intraoral scanners was dependent on the volumetric dimensions of the complete arch, but the volumetric dimensions of the complete arch had no effect on the accuracy of the desktop scanner. Additionally, depending on the type of intraoral scanners, the accuracy differed according to the volumetric dimensions of the complete arch.

Keywords

References

  1. Park JM, Kim RJ, Lee KW. Comparative reproducibility analysis of 6 intraoral scanners used on complex intracoronal preparations. J Prosthet Dent 2020;123:113-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.10.025
  2. Braian M, Wennerberg A. Trueness and precision of 5 intraoral scanners for scanning edentulous and dentate completearch mandibular casts: A comparative in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2019;122:129-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.10.007
  3. Park GH, Son K, Lee KB. Feasibility of using an intraoral scanner for a complete-arch digital scan. J Prosthet Dent 2019;121:803-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.07.014
  4. Ender A, Attin T, Mehl A. In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods of obtaining complete-arch dental impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:313-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.09.011
  5. Duret F, Blouin JL, Duret B. CAD-CAM in dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 1988;117:715-20. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1988.0096
  6. Arezoobakhsh A, Shayegh SS, Jamali Ghomi A, Hakimaneh SMR. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit zirconia frameworks fabricated with CAD-CAM technology using direct and indirect digital scans. J Prosthet Dent 2020;123: 105-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.10.023
  7. Revilla-Leon M, Jiang P, Sadeghpour M, Piedra-Cascon W, Zandinejad A, Ozcan M, Krishnamurthy VR. Intraoral digital scans-Part 1: Influence of ambient scanning light conditions on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of different intraoral scanners. J Prosthet Dent 2020;124:372-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.003
  8. Revilla-Leon M, Jiang P, Sadeghpour M, Piedra-Cascon W, Zandinejad A, Ozcan M, Krishnamurthy VR. Intraoral digital scans: Part 2-influence of ambient scanning light conditions on the mesh quality of different intraoral scanners. J Prosthet Dent 2020;124:575-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.004
  9. Al Hamad KQ. Learning curve of intraoral scanning by prosthodontic residents. J Prosthet Dent 2020;123:277-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.04.003
  10. Lim JH, Park JM, Kim M, Heo SJ, Myung JY. Comparison of digital intraoral scanner reproducibility and image trueness considering repetitive experience. J Prosthet Dent 2018;119: 225-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.05.002
  11. Park HN, Lim YJ, Yi WJ, Han JS, Lee SP. A comparison of the accuracy of intraoral scanners using an intraoral environment simulator. J Adv Prosthodont 2018;10:58-64. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2018.10.1.58
  12. Michelinakis G, Apostolakis D, Tsagarakis A, Kourakis G, Pavlakis E. A comparison of accuracy of 3 intraoral scanners: A single-blinded in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2020;124:581-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.10.023
  13. Medina-Sotomayor P, Pascual-Moscardo A, Camps A I. Accuracy of 4 digital scanning systems on prepared teeth digitally isolated from a complete dental arch. J Prosthet Dent 2019;121:811-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.08.020
  14. Nedelcu RG, Persson AS. Scanning accuracy and precision in 4 intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparison based on 3-dimensional analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112:1461-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.05.027
  15. Nedelcu R, Olsson P, Nyström I, Thor A. Finish line distinctness and accuracy in 7 intraoral scanners versus conventional impression: an in vitro descriptive comparison. BMC Oral Health 2018;18:27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0489-3
  16. Chiu A, Chen YW, Hayashi J, Sadr A. Accuracy of CAD/CAM digital impressions with different intraoral scanner parameters. Sensors (Basel) 2020;20:1157. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20041157
  17. Oh KC, Park JM, Moon HS. 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 2020;29:518-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13158
  18. Koulivand S, Ghodsi S, Siadat H, Alikhasi M. A clinical comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques regarding finish line locations and impression time. J Esthet Restor Dent 2019;32:236-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12527
  19. Abdel-Azim T, Rogers K, Elathamna E, Zandinejad A, Metz M, Morton D. Comparison of the marginal fit 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
  20. Sami T, Goldstein G, Vafiadis D, Absher T. An in vitro 3D evaluation of the accuracy of 4 intraoral optical scanners on a 6-implant model. J Prosthet Dent 2020;124:748-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.10.013
  21. Ender A, Zimmermann M, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete- and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro. Int J Comput Dent 2019;22:11-9.
  22. Bilmenoglu C, Cilingir A, Geckili O, Bilhan H, Bilgin T. In vitro comparison of trueness of 10 intraoral scanners for implant-supported complete-arch fixed dental prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2020;124:755-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.11.017
  23. Renne W, Ludlow M, Fryml J, Schurch Z, Mennito A, Kessler R, Lauer A. Evaluation of the accuracy of 7 digital scanners: An in vitro analysis based on 3-dimensional comparisons. J Prosthet Dent 2017;118:36-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.09.024
  24. Camardella LT, Breuning H, de Vasconcellos Vilella O. Accuracy and reproducibility of measurements on plaster models and digital models created using an intraoral scanner. J Orofac Orthop 2017;78:211-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-016-0070-0
  25. Zimmermann M, Koller C, Rumetsch M, Ender A, Mehl A. Precision of guided scanning procedures for full-arch digital impressions in vivo. J Orofac Orthop 2017;78:466-71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-017-0103-3
  26. Uhm SH, Kim JH, Jiang HB, Woo CW, Chang M, Kim KN, Bae JM, Oh S. Evaluation of the accuracy and precision of four intraoral scanners with 70% reduced inlay and four-unit bridge models of international standard. Dent Mater J 2017;36:27-34. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2016-064
  27. Marghalani A, Weber HP, Finkelman M, Kudara Y, El Rafie K, Papaspyridakos P. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for partially edentulous arches: An evaluation of accuracy. J Prosthet Dent 2018;119:574-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.07.002
  28. Patzelt SB, Bishti S, Stampf S, Att W. Accuracy of computer-aided 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
  29. Persson AS, Andersson M, Odén A, Sandborgh-Englund G. Computer aided analysis of digitized dental stone replicas by dental CAD/CAM technology. Dent Mater 2008;24:1123-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2008.01.008
  30. Kaindl K, Steipe B. Metric properties of the root-meansquare deviation of vector sets. Acta Crystallogr A 1997;53:809. https://doi.org/10.1107/S0108767397010325
  31. Bu X, Khalaf K, Hobson RS. Dental arch dimensions in oligodontia patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:768-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.03.029
  32. Dung TM, Ngoc VT, Hiep NH, Khoi TD, Van Xiem V, ChuDinh T, Bac ND. Evaluation of dental arch dimensions in 12 year-old Vietnamese children-A cross-sectional study of 4565 subjects. Sci Rep 2019;9:1-7.
  33. Yzquierdo-Correa C, Portocarrero-Reyes W, Carruitero MJ, Claudet-Angulo P. Dental arch width in overweight and normal-weight subjects. J Dent Res 2019;8:9-12.
  34. Haque F, Alam MK. Tooth size dimension norms and sexual disparities for various populations: An overview. Int Med J 2017;24:272-4.
  35. Latham J, Ludlow M, Mennito A, Kelly A, Evans Z, Renne W. Effect of scan pattern on complete-arch scans with 4 digital scanners. J Prosthet Dent 2020;123:85-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.02.008
  36. ISO 12836. Dentistry-Digitizing devices for CAD/CAM systems for indirect dental restorations-Test methods for assessing accuracy. International Standards Organization (ISO); Geneva; Switzerland, 2015. Available at: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:12836:ed-2:v1:en Accessed July 31, 2018.
  37. Son K, Lee KB. Effect of tooth types on the accuracy of dental 3d scanners: An in vitro study. Materials (Basel) 2020;13:1744. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13071744

Cited by

  1. Comparison of Intaglio Surface Trueness of Interim Dental Crowns Fabricated with SLA 3D Printing, DLP 3D Printing, and Milling Technologies vol.9, pp.8, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9080983