Ryakhovskiy A N, Kostyukova V V
Central Research Institute of Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery, Moscow, Russia.
Stomatologiia (Mosk). 2016;95(4):65-70. doi: 10.17116/stomat201695465-70.
The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of digital impressions taken by different intraoral and laboratory scanners. For this purpose a synthetic jaw model with prepared tooth was scanned using intraoral scanning systems: 3D Progress (MHT S.P.A., IT - MHT Optic Research AG, CH); True Definition (3M ESPE, USA); Trios (3Shape A/S, DNK); CEREC AC Bluecam, CEREC Omnicam (Sirona Dental System GmbH, DE); Planscan (Planmeca, FIN); and laboratory scanning systems: s600 ARTI (Zirkonzahn GmbH, IT); Imetric Iscan D104, CH); D900 (3Shape A/S, DNK); Zfx Evolution (Zfx GmbH, DE) (each n=10). Reference-scanning was done by ATOS Core (GOM mbH, DE). The resulting digital impressions were superimposed with the master-scan. The measured deviations by points (trueness) for intraoral scanners were: True Definition - 15.0±2.85 μm (single tooth) and 45.0±19.11 µm (full arch); Trios - 17.1±1.44 and 58.8±27.36 µm; CEREC AC Bluecam - 22.3±5.58 and 20.3±4.13 µm; CEREC Omnicam - 25.0±1.06 and 78.5±27.03 µm; 3D Progress - 26.4±5.75 and 213.5±47.44 µm; Planscan - 54.6±11.58 and 205.2±21.73 µm. For laboratory scanners: Imetric Iscan D104 - 10.2±0.87 μm (stamp) and 65.3±5.36 µm (full arch); Zfx Evolution - 12.8±0.83 and 66.4±2.80 µm; Zirkonzahn s600 ARTI - 15.1±1.36 and 65.9±1.33 µm; 3Shape D900 - 19.9±0.53 and 63.6±0.83 µm. Precision was: True Definition - 19.9±2.77 μm (single tooth) and 40.1±11.04 µm (full arch); Trios - 25.8±2.49 and 69.9±18.95 µm; CEREC AC Bluecam - 36.4±2.78 and 46.6±3.44 µm; CEREC Omnicam - 37.6±3.29 and 76.2±13.36 µm; 3D Progress - 76.9±11.04 and 102.2±8.06 µm; Planscan - 74.3±6.58 and 93.9±15.32 µm. For laboratory scanners: Imetric Iscan D104 - 11.7±4.39 μm (stamp) and 31.2±5.58 µm (full arch); Zfx Evolution - 8.4±0.49 and 24.8±3.98 µm; Zirkonzahn s600 ARTI - 13.4±6.74 and 20.7±4.34 µm; 3Shape D900 - 10.4±0.93 and 17.8±0.62 µm. Whole deviation of the dental arch was: 3D Progress - 98.0±5.70 µm; True Definition - 47.1±9.61 µm; Trios - 59.6±18.77 µm; Omnicam - 77.8±8.79 µm; Planscan - 107.9±1.58 µm; Bluecam - 46.8±1.22 µm; Imetric - 36.4±1.62 µm; Zfx Evolution - 29.5±0.58 µm; S600 ARTI - 35.0±1.04 µm; 3Shape D900 - 32.7±0.29 µm. The results indicate that digital impressions provide enough accuracy for clinical application.
本研究的目的是比较不同口腔内扫描仪和实验室扫描仪所获取数字印模的准确性。为此，使用口腔内扫描系统对带有预备牙的合成颌骨模型进行扫描：3D Progress（意大利MHT S.P.A. - 瑞士MHT Optic Research AG）；True Definition（美国3M ESPE）；Trios（丹麦3Shape A/S）；CEREC AC Bluecam、CEREC Omnicam（德国Sirona Dental System GmbH）；Planscan（芬兰Planmeca）；以及实验室扫描系统：s600 ARTI（意大利Zirkonzahn GmbH）；Imetric Iscan D104（瑞士）；D900（丹麦3Shape A/S）；Zfx Evolution（德国Zfx GmbH）（每组n = 10）。参考扫描由ATOS Core（德国GOM mbH）完成。将所得数字印模与主扫描进行叠加。口腔内扫描仪各点测量偏差（准确性）为：True Definition - 单颗牙15.0±2.85μm，全牙弓45.0±19.11μm；Trios - 17.1±1.44和58.8±27.36μm；CEREC AC Bluecam - 22.3±5.58和20.3±4.13μm；CEREC Omnicam - 25.0±1.06和78.5±27.03μm；3D Progress - 26.4±5.75和213.5±47.44μm；Planscan - 54.6±11.58和205.2±21.73μm。实验室扫描仪的偏差为：Imetric Iscan D104 - 印模10.2±0.87μm，全牙弓65.3±5.36μm；Zfx Evolution - 12.8±0.83和66.4±2.80μm；Zirkonzahn s600 ARTI - 15.1±1.36和65.9±1.33μm；3Shape D900 - 19.9±0.53和63.6±0.83μm。精密度为：True Definition - 单颗牙19.9±2.77μm，全牙弓40.1±11.04μm；Trios - 25.8±2.49和69.9±18.95μm；CEREC AC Bluecam - 36.4±2.78和46.6±3.44μm；CEREC Omnicam - 37.6±3.29和76.2±13.36μm；3D Progress - 76.9±11.04和102.2±8.06μm；Planscan - 74.3±6.58和93.9±15.32μm。实验室扫描仪的精密度为：Imetric Iscan D104 - 印模11.7±4.39μm，全牙弓31.2±5.58μm；Zfx Evolution - 8.4±0.49和24.8±3.98μm；Zirkonzahn s600 ARTI - 13.4±6.74和20.7±4.34μm；3Shape D900 - 10.4±0.93和17.8±0.62μm。牙弓整体偏差为：3D Progress - 98.0±5.70μm；True Definition - 47.1±9.61μm；Trios - 59.6±18.77μm；Omnicam - 77.8±8.79μm；Planscan - 107.9±1.58μm；Bluecam - 46.8±1.22μm；Imetric - 36.4±1.62μm；Zfx Evolution - 29.5±0.58μm；S600 ARTI - 35.0±1.04μm；3Shape D900 - 32.7±0.29μm。结果表明，数字印模为临床应用提供了足够的准确性。
