Gedrimiene Agne, Adaskevicius Rimas, Rutkunas Vygandas
Department of Prosthodontics, Institute of Odontology, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Lithuania.
Department of Electrical Power Systems, Faculty of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Kaunas University of Technology, Lithuania.
J Adv Prosthodont. 2019 Oct;11(5):271-279. doi: 10.4047/jap.2019.11.5.271. Epub 2019 Oct 30.
The newest technologies for digital implant impression (DII) taking are developing rapidly and showing acceptable clinical results. However, scientific literature is lacking data from clinical studies about the accuracy of DII. The aim of this study was to compare digital and conventional dental implant impressions (CII) in a clinical environment.
Twenty-four fixed zirconia restorations supported by 2 implants were fabricated using conventional open-tray impression technique with splinted transfers (CII group) and scan with Trios 3 IOS (3Shape) (DII group). After multiple verification procedures, master models were scanned using laboratory scanner D800 (3Shape). 3D models from conventional and digital workflow were imported to reverse engineering software and superimposed with high resolution 3D CAD models of scan bodies. Distance between center points, angulation, rotation, vertical shift, and surface mismatch of the scan bodies were measured and compared between conventional and digital impressions.
Statistically significant differences were found for: a) inter-implant distance, b) rotation, c) vertical shift, and d) surface mismatch differences, comparing DII and CII groups for mesial and dist al implant scan bodies (≤.05).
Recorded linear differences between digital and conventional impressions were of limited clinical significance with two implant-supported restorations.
用于获取数字化种植体印模(DII)的最新技术正在迅速发展,并显示出可接受的临床效果。然而,科学文献缺乏关于DII准确性的临床研究数据。本研究的目的是在临床环境中比较数字化和传统牙科种植体印模(CII)。
使用传统的带夹板转移的开放式托盘印模技术(CII组)制作由2颗种植体支持的24个固定氧化锆修复体,并用Trios 3口腔内扫描仪(3Shape)进行扫描(DII组)。经过多次验证程序后,使用实验室扫描仪D800(3Shape)对主模型进行扫描。将传统和数字化工作流程的3D模型导入逆向工程软件,并与扫描体的高分辨率3D CAD模型进行叠加。测量并比较传统印模和数字化印模之间扫描体的中心点距离、角度、旋转、垂直位移和表面不匹配情况。
在比较DII组和CII组近中及远中种植体扫描体时,发现以下方面存在统计学显著差异:a)种植体间距离,b)旋转,c)垂直位移,d)表面不匹配差异(≤.05)。
对于两个种植体支持的修复体,数字化印模和传统印模之间记录的线性差异具有有限的临床意义。