Journal of Korean Dental Science

  • 제15권1호
  • /
  • Pages.61-67
  • /
  • 2022
  • /
  • 2005-4742(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2713-7651(eISSN)
대한치의학회 (Korean Academy of Dental Science)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Accuracy of Bite Registration Using Intraoral Scanner Based on Data Trimming Strategy for Fremitus Teeth

  • Jeong, Yuwon (Department of Prosthodontics, Yonsei University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Shim, June-Sung (Department of Prosthodontics, Yonsei University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Kim, Jee-Hwan (Department of Prosthodontics, Yonsei University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Kim, Jong-Eun (Department of Prosthodontics, Yonsei University College of Dentistry) ;
  • Lee, Hyeonjong (Department of Prosthodontics, Yonsei University College of Dentistry)
  • 투고 : 2022.04.25
  • 심사 : 2022.06.10
  • 발행 : 2022.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of bite registration using intraoral scanner based on data trimming strategy for fremitus teeth. Materials and Methods: A reference model was designed by Medit Model Builder software (MEDIT Corp., Seoul). Tooth number 24 and 25 were separated as dies and tooth number 26 was prepared for full-coverage crown. Those were printed using a 3D printer (NextDent 5100). The scanning procedure was performed by a single trained operator with one intraoral scanner (i700; MEDIT Corp.). The scanning groups were divided as follows: group 1 (G1), no fremitus; group 2 (G2), 0.5 mm buccal fremitus in the maxillary left first and second premolar; and group 3 (G3), 1.5 mm buccal fremitus in the maxillary left first and second premolar. Each group was scanned 10 times and were analyzed using the reference model data. Surface-based occlusal clearance was analyzed at the prepared tooth to evaluate accuracy. Result: Mean values of control group (G1) were 1.587±0.021 mm. G2 showed similar values to those from the control group (1.580±0.024 mm before trimming strategy and 1.588±0.052 mm after trimming strategy). G3 showed significantly greater values (1.627±0.025 mm before trimming strategy and 1.590±0.024 mm after trimming strategy) and the differences were found between trimming strategy (P=0.004). Conclusion: Bite trimming strategy for fremitus teeth is a reliable technique to reduce inaccuracies caused by the mobility at maximum intercuspation.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Joda T, Bragger U. Time-efficiency analysis of the treatment with monolithic implant crowns in a digital workflow: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016; 27: 1401-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12753
  2. Ender A, Zimmermann M, Attin T, Mehl A. In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods for obtaining quadrant dental impressions. Clin Oral Investig. 2016; 20: 1495-504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1641-y
  3. Camci H, Salmanpour F. A new technique for testing accuracy and sensitivity of digital bite registration: a prospective comparative study. Int Orthod. 2021; 19: 425-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ortho.2021.06.008
  4. Park JM, Jeon J, Heo SJ. Accuracy comparison of buccal bite scans by five intra-oral scanners. J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci. 2018; 34: 17-31. https://doi.org/10.14368/jdras.2018.34.1.17
  5. Ponce-Garcia C, Ruellas ACO, Cevidanes LHS, Flores-Mir C, Carey JP, Lagravere-Vich M. Measurement error and reliability of three available 3D superimposition methods in growing patients. Head Face Med. 2020; 16: 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13005-020-0215-7
  6. Megremis S, Tiba A, Vogt K. An evaluation of eight elastomeric occlusal registration materials. J Am Dent Assoc. 2012; 143: 1358-60. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2012.0101
  7. Dua P, Gupta SH, Ramachandran S, Sandhu HS. Evaluation of four elastomeric interocclusal recording materials. Med J Armed Forces India. 2007; 63: 237-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-1237(07)80143-2
  8. Breeding LC, Dixon DL. Compression resistance of four interocclusal recording materials. J Prosthet Dent. 1992; 68: 876-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90542-I
  9. Wieckiewicz M, Grychowska N, Zietek M, Wieckiewicz W. Evaluation of the elastic properties of thirteen silicone interocclusal recording materials. Biomed Res Int. 2016; 2016: 7456046.
  10. Sweeney S, Smith DK, Messersmith M. Comparison of 5 types of interocclusal recording materials on the accuracy of articulation of digital models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 148: 245-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.04.025
  11. 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
  12. Zimmermann M, Ender A, Mehl A. Local accuracy of actual intraoral scanning systems for single-tooth preparations in vitro. J Am Dent Assoc. 2020; 151: 127-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2019.10.022
  13. Kim JH, Son SA, Lee H, Yoo YJ, Hong SJ, Park JK. Influence of adjacent teeth on the accuracy of intraoral scanning systems for class II inlay preparation. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12824. [Epub ahead of print]
  14. Tomita Y, Uechi J, Konno M, Sasamoto S, Iijima M, Mizoguchi I. Accuracy of digital models generated by conventional impression/plaster-model methods and intraoral scanning. Dent Mater J. 2018; 37: 628-33. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2017-208
  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. 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