Suppr超能文献

口腔内和口腔外数字扫描仪的比较:表面形貌和精度评估。

Comparison of Intraoral and Extraoral Digital Scanners: Evaluation of Surface Topography and Precision.

作者信息

Lee Sang J, Kim Soo-Woo, Lee Joshua J, Cheong Chan W

机构信息

Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials Sciences, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

Department of Oral Medicine, Infection, and Immunity, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

出版信息

Dent J (Basel). 2020 May 20;8(2):52. doi: 10.3390/dj8020052.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface topography and the precision measurements of different intraoral and extraoral digital scanners. A reference model of a maxillary arch with four implant analogs was prepared and scanned by three intraoral and two extraoral scanners. The reference model was scanned fifteen times with each digital scanning system, investigating the surface topography and precision measurements for the same-arch and cross-arch measurements. The data was exported to 3D inspection and mesh-processing software (GOM Inspect, Braunschweig, Germany). Statistical analysis was performed using a one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with the Tukey method for pairwise comparisons. The effect of parameters on generating the surface topography was analyzed by Univariate Linear Regression Analysis. Of the scanner systems evaluated, iTero (IT) exhibited the most number of triangulation points, followed by Trios 3 Shape (TR) and Straumann Cares (SC). There were no significant differences observed in the surface topography when comparing flat and contoured surfaces, the anterior and posterior position, and interproximal areas. For the precision measurement in the same quadrant, no statistical difference was noted between intra- and extraoral scanners. However, the extraoral scanners showed substantially higher precision measurements for the cross-arch measurement. Surface topography did not correlate to precision. Rather, precision correlated with the scanning mechanism. For a quadrant scanning, both intraoral and extraoral scanners are recommended, but extraoral scanners are recommended for a full-arch scanning.

摘要

本研究的目的是评估不同口腔内和口腔外数字扫描仪的表面形貌和精度测量。制备了一个带有四个种植体模拟物的上颌牙弓参考模型,并使用三台口腔内扫描仪和两台口腔外扫描仪进行扫描。每个数字扫描系统对参考模型进行了15次扫描,研究了同牙弓和跨牙弓测量的表面形貌和精度测量。数据被导出到3D检测和网格处理软件(德国不伦瑞克的GOM Inspect)。使用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)和Tukey方法进行成对比较进行统计分析。通过单变量线性回归分析分析参数对生成表面形貌的影响。在所评估的扫描仪系统中,iTero(IT)的三角测量点数量最多,其次是Trios 3 Shape(TR)和Straumann Cares(SC)。在比较平坦和有轮廓的表面、前后位置以及邻间隙区域时,表面形貌没有观察到显著差异。对于同一象限内的精度测量,口腔内和口腔外扫描仪之间没有统计学差异。然而,口腔外扫描仪在跨牙弓测量中显示出显著更高的精度测量。表面形貌与精度无关。相反,精度与扫描机制相关。对于象限扫描,建议同时使用口腔内和口腔外扫描仪,但对于全牙弓扫描,建议使用口腔外扫描仪。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2dad/7344681/57af21ef6d15/dentistry-08-00052-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验