Albdour Emad A, Shaheen Eman, Vranckx Myrthel, Mangano Francesco Guido, Politis Constantinus, Jacobs Reinhilde
OMFS IMPATH research group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leuven and Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Department of Prosthodontics, Royal Medical Services, Jordanian Armed Forces, Amman, Jordan.
BMC Oral Health. 2018 Jul 3;18(1):117. doi: 10.1186/s12903-018-0580-9.
Intraoral scanners are devices for capturing digital impressions in dentistry. Until now, several in vitro studies have assessed the trueness of digital impressions, but in vivo studies are missing. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to introduce a new method to assess trueness of intraoral scanners and digital impressions in an in vivo clinical set-up.
A digital impression using an intraoral scanner (Trios® 3 Cart wired, 3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) and a conventional alginate impression (Cavex Impressional®, Cavex, Haarlem, the Netherlands) as clinical reference were made for two patients assigned for full mouth extraction. A total of 30 teeth were collected upon surgery after impressions making. The gypsum model created from conventional impression and extracted teeth were then scanned in a lab scanner (Activity 885®, SmartOptics, Bochum, Germany). Digital model of the intraoral scanner (DM), digital model of the conventional gypsum cast (CM) and those of the extracted natural teeth (NT) were imported to a reverse engineering software (3-matic®, Materialise, Leuven, Belgium) in which the three models were registered then DM and CM were compared to their corresponding teeth in NT by distance map calculations.
DM had statistically insignificant better trueness when compared to CM for total dataset (p = 0.15), statistically insignificant better trueness for CM when mandibular arches analyzed alone (p = 0.56), while a significantly better DM trueness (p = 0.013) was found when only maxillary arches were compared.
Our results show that digital impression technique is clinically as good as or better than the current reference standard for study models of orthognathic surgery patients.
口腔内扫描仪是牙科中用于获取数字印模的设备。到目前为止,已有多项体外研究评估了数字印模的准确性,但缺乏体内研究。因此,本研究的目的是引入一种新方法,在体内临床环境中评估口腔内扫描仪和数字印模的准确性。
使用口腔内扫描仪(丹麦哥本哈根3Shape公司的Trios® 3 Cart有线型)为两名计划进行全口拔牙的患者制作数字印模,并制作传统藻酸盐印模(荷兰哈勒姆Cavex公司的Cavex Impressional®)作为临床对照。在取模后手术时共收集30颗牙齿。然后,将由传统印模制作的石膏模型和拔除的牙齿在实验室扫描仪(德国波鸿SmartOptics公司的Activity 885®)中进行扫描。将口腔内扫描仪的数字模型(DM)、传统石膏模型的数字模型(CM)和拔除的天然牙齿的数字模型(NT)导入逆向工程软件(比利时鲁汶Materialise公司的3-matic®),在该软件中对三个模型进行配准,然后通过距离图计算将DM和CM与其在NT中的对应牙齿进行比较。
对于整个数据集,DM与CM相比,准确性在统计学上无显著差异(p = 0.15);单独分析下颌牙弓时,CM的准确性在统计学上无显著差异(p = 0.56),而仅比较上颌牙弓时,DM的准确性显著更高(p = 0.013)。
我们的结果表明,对于正颌外科患者的研究模型,数字印模技术在临床上与当前参考标准一样好或更好。