The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

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

DOI QR Code

Recording maximal intercuspation and border positions of the mandible with intraoral scanner using the acquisition software's multi-occlusion function

  • Noha Morsy (Fixed Prosthodontics, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Alexandria University) ;
  • Ihab Hammad (Fixed Prosthodontics, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Alexandria University)
  • Received : 2024.04.07
  • Accepted : 2024.07.01
  • Published : 2024.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. This in vitro study was conducted to investigate the accuracy of intraoral scanner (IOS) for recording maximal intercuspal position (MIP) and border positions of the mandible. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Maxillary and mandibular master casts were articulated in MIP, protrusive, and lateral interocclusal position sequentially on a semi-adjustable articulator. For each articulation relation, sites of occlusal contacts (SOCs) and sites of clearance (SCs) were identified on the master casts with articulating paper (reference sites). IOS was used to take full arch scans and nine virtual interocclusal records (VIRs) for virtual articulation of models. Virtual SOCs and SCs were detected with 3D processing software and compared to those identified with the articulating paper. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for each articulation relation. RESULTS. For MIP, IOS showed adequate sensitivity and NPV of 100%, and specificity and a PPV of 99%. For protrusive position, the IOS showed a sensitivity and a NPV of 100%, a high PPV of 86%, and a specificity of 83%. For lateral positions, the specificity and the PPV were high (93% and 79%, respectively), but the sensitivity and the NPV were below the clinically acceptable limits (28% and 56%, respectively). CONCLUSION. IOS displayed clinically acceptable accuracy for recording MIP and protrusive border mandibular position. However, IOS had less accuracy for lateral border mandibular position.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Ahmed Menecy for his valuable participation in conducting the methodology of the study.

References

  1. Edher F, Hannam AG, Tobias DL, Wyatt CCL. The accuracy of virtual interocclusal registration during intraoral scanning. J Prosthet Dent 2018;120:904-12.
  2. Hsu MR, Driscoll CF, Romberg E, Masri R. Accuracy of dynamic virtual articulation: trueness and precision. J Prosthodont 2019;28:436-43.
  3. Solaberrieta E, Otegi JR, Goicoechea N, Brizuela A, Pradies G. Comparison of a conventional and virtual occlusal record. J Prosthet Dent 2015;114:92-7.
  4. Stavness IK, Hannam AG, Tobias DL, Zhang X. Simulation of dental collisions and occlusal dynamics in the virtual environment. J Oral Rehabil 2016;43:269-78.
  5. Morsy N, El Kateb M. Accuracy of intraoral scanners for static virtual articulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of multiple outcomes. J Prosthet Dent 2022:S0022-3913(22)00608-4.
  6. Iwaki Y, Wakabayashi N, Igarashi Y. Dimensional accuracy of optical bite registration in single and multiple unit restorations. Oper Dent 2013;38:309-15.
  7. Arslan Y, Bankoglu Gungor M, Karakoca Nemli S, Kokdogan Boyaci B, Aydin C. Comparison of maximum intercuspal contacts of articulated casts and virtual casts requiring posterior fixed partial dentures. J Prosthodont 2017;26:594-8.
  8. Abdulateef S, Edher F, Hannam AG, Tobias DL, Wyatt CCL. Clinical accuracy and reproducibility of virtual interocclusal records. J Prosthet Dent 2020;124:667-73.
  9. Fraile C, Ferreiroa A, Romeo M, Alonso R, Pradies G. Clinical study comparing the accuracy of interocclusal records, digitally obtained by three different devices. Clin Oral Investig 2022;26:1957-62.
  10. Fraile C, Ferreiroa A, Solaberrieta E, Pradies G. Intraoral versus extraoral digital occlusal records: a pilot study. Int J Comput Dent 2018;21:329-33.
  11. Li L, Chen H, Wang Y, Sun Y. Construction of virtual intercuspal occlusion: considering tooth displacement. J Oral Rehabil 2021;48:701-10.
  12. Gintaute A, Keeling AJ, Osnes CA, Zitzmann NU, Ferrari M, Joda T. Precision of maxillo-mandibular registration with intraoral scanners in vitro. J Prosthodont Res 2020;64:114-9.
  13. Morsy N, El Kateb M. In vivo precision of digital static interocclusal registration for full arch and quadrant arch scans: a randomized controlled clinical trial. BMC Oral Health 2022;22:559.
  14. Delong R, Ko CC, Anderson GC, Hodges JS, Douglas WH. Comparing maximum intercuspal contacts of virtual dental patients and mounted dental casts. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:622-30.
  15. Kent P, Hancock MJ. Interpretation of dichotomous outcomes: sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and pre-test and post-test probability. J Physiother 2016;62:231-3.
  16. Yu JH, Lin CC, Chen YH. Changes in mandibular border movements in adult patients after correction of functional anterior crossbite. J Dent Sci 2017;12:139-44.
  17. Chuhuaicura P, Lezcano MF, Dias FJ, Fuentes AD, Arias A, Fuentes R. Mandibular border movements: the two envelopes of motion. J Oral Rehabil. 2021;48:384-91.
  18. Nemli SK, Wolfart S, Reich S. InLab and Cerec Connect: virtual contacts in maximum intercuspation compared with original contacts-an in vitro study. Int J Comput Dent 2012;15:23-31.
  19. Solaberrieta E, Garmendia A, Brizuela A, Otegi JR, Pradies G, Szentpetery A. Intraoral digital impressions for virtual occlusal records: section quantity and dimensions. Biomed Res Int 2016;2016:7173824.
  20. Solaberrieta E, Arias A, Brizuela A, Garikano X, Pradies G. Determining the requirements, section quantity, and dimension of the virtual occlusal record. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:52-6.
  21. Ury E, Fornai C, Weber GW. Accuracy of transferring analog dental casts to a virtual articulator. J Prosthet Dent 2020;123:305-13.
  22. The American National Standards Institute and American Dental Association. ANSI/ADA132:2015. Scanning accuracy of dental chair side and laboratory CAD/CAM systems. Chicago: American Dental Association; 2015. Available at https://ebusiness.ada.org/productcatalog/10944/Dental Equipment/ANSIADA-Standard-No-132-Scanning-Accuracy-of-Dental Chair-Si/ADA132-2015.
  23. Coelho MF, Cavalcanti Bd, Claro Neves AC, Joias RP, Rode Sde M. Influence of dental chair backrest inclination on the registration of the mandibular position. J Prosthet Dent 2015;114:693-5.
  24. Berry DC, Singh BP. Daily variations in occlusal contacts. J Prosthet Dent 1983;50:386-91.
  25. Riise C, Ericsson SG. A clinical study of the distribution of occlusal tooth contacts in the intercuspal position at light and hard pressure in adults. J Oral Rehabil 1983;10:473-80.