Matta Ragai Edward, Adler Werner, Wichmann Manfred, Heckmann Siegfried Martin
Assistant Professor, University Clinic Erlangen, Dental Clinic 2, Department of Prosthodontics, Glueckstrasse, Erlangen, Germany.
Assistant Professor, Department of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Universitaetsstrasse, Erlangen, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Apr;117(4):507-512. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.07.026. Epub 2016 Oct 27.
Accurate virtual implant models are a necessity for the fabrication of precisely fitting superstructures.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate different methods with which to build an accurate virtual model of a 3-dimensional implant in the oral cavity; this model would then be used for iterative computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) procedures.
A titanium master model with 3 rigidly connected implants was manufactured and digitized with a noncontact industrial scanner to obtain a virtual master model. Impressions of the master model with the implant position locators (IPL) were made using vinyl siloxanether material. The impressions were scanned (Impression scanning technique group). For the transfer technique and pick-up technique groups (each group n=20), implant analogs were inserted into the impression copings, impressions were made using polyether, and casts were poured in Type 4 gypsum. The IPLs were screwed into the analogs and scanned. To compare the virtual master model with each virtual test model, a CAD interactive software, ATOS professional, was applied. The Kruskal-Wallis test was subsequently used to determine the overall difference between groups, with the Mann-Whitney U test used for pairwise comparisons. Through Bonferroni correction, the α-level was set to .017.
The outcome revealed a significant difference among the 3 groups (P<.01) in terms of accuracy. With regard to total deviation, for all axes, the transfer technique generated the greatest divergence, 0.078 mm (±0.022), compared with the master model. Deviation with the pick-up technique was 0.041 mm (±0.009), with impression scanning generating the most accurate models with a deviation of 0.022 mm (±0.007).
The impression scanning method improved the precision of CAD-CAM-fabricated superstructures.
精确的虚拟种植体模型是制作精确贴合的上部结构所必需的。
本体外研究的目的是评估构建口腔三维种植体精确虚拟模型的不同方法;该模型随后将用于迭代计算机辅助设计和计算机辅助制造(CAD-CAM)程序。
制作一个带有3个刚性连接种植体的钛质母模,并用非接触式工业扫描仪进行数字化处理以获得虚拟母模。使用乙烯基硅氧烷醚材料制作带有种植体位置定位器(IPL)的母模印模。对印模进行扫描(印模扫描技术组)。对于转移技术组和取模技术组(每组n = 20),将种植体代型插入印模帽中,使用聚醚制作印模,并灌注4型石膏模型。将IPL拧入代型并进行扫描。为了将虚拟母模与每个虚拟测试模型进行比较,应用了一款CAD交互式软件ATOS professional。随后使用Kruskal-Wallis检验确定组间的总体差异,使用Mann-Whitney U检验进行两两比较。通过Bonferroni校正,将α水平设定为0.017。
结果显示,3组在准确性方面存在显著差异(P <.01)。就总偏差而言,在所有轴向上,与母模相比,转移技术产生的偏差最大,为0.078 mm(±0.022)。取模技术的偏差为0.041 mm(±0.009),印模扫描生成的模型最精确,偏差为0.022 mm(±0.007)。
印模扫描方法提高了CAD-CAM制作的上部结构的精度。