Quintessence Int. 2021 May 7;52(6):488-495. doi: 10.3290/j.qi.b1244373.
This study aimed to compare the accuracy performance of five different intraoral scanning systems for a full-arch scan on an edentulous cadaver maxilla.
Five digital intraoral impression systems were used to scan a fully edentulous cadaver maxilla. A master scan obtained with an ATOS Capsule industrial grade scanner provided the point of comparison. Experimental scans were compared to the master scan using a metrology software that allows images to be overlayed on one another and deviations interpreted. Once aligned, three comparisons were made between the experimental scans and the reference: the entire maxilla, the ridge area only, and the palate area only.
Trueness deviations between the experimental scans and the master digital model were up to 0.1 mm in the 75th percentile. For the whole maxilla, only the Medit scanner had statistically significantly inferior trueness compared to other scanners. When only the palate was considered, Medit was significantly different from Element (P = .0025) and Trios 4 (P = .0040), with no differences found between other scanners. For the ridge region the results replicate the trend observed for the whole maxilla. In regard to precision, differences were found only in the whole maxilla and the ridge area. In both areas, only Medit's precision was significantly different compared to other scanners, with the exception of Element. However, Element performance was similar to all other scanners.
Most intraoral scanners exhibited similar performance. Although several statistically significant differences were identified, the clinical impact of these variances is probably not meaningful. (Quintessence Int 2021;52:488-495; doi: 10.3290/j.qi.b1244373).
本研究旨在比较五种不同的口内扫描系统在无牙颌上颌全口扫描中的准确性表现。
使用五种数字化口内扫描系统扫描一具完全无牙的尸体上颌骨。使用 ATOS Capsule 工业级扫描仪获得的主扫描作为比较点。使用允许图像相互叠加并解释偏差的计量软件比较实验扫描与主扫描。对齐后，在实验扫描和参考之间进行了三次比较：整个上颌骨、牙槽嵴区域和腭区域。
实验扫描与主数字模型之间的真实偏差在第 75 百分位高达 0.1 毫米。对于整个上颌骨，只有 Medit 扫描仪的真实度与其他扫描仪相比具有统计学上的显著差异。当仅考虑腭部时，Medit 与 Element（P =.0025）和 Trios 4（P =.0040）有显著差异，而其他扫描仪之间没有差异。对于牙槽嵴区域，结果复制了观察到的整个上颌骨的趋势。在精度方面，仅在整个上颌骨和牙槽嵴区域发现差异。在这两个区域中，只有 Medit 的精度与其他扫描仪有显著差异，除了 Element。然而，Element 的性能与所有其他扫描仪相似。
大多数口内扫描仪表现出相似的性能。尽管确定了几个具有统计学意义的差异，但这些差异的临床意义可能并不重要。（《牙髓病学杂志》2021 年；52：488-495；doi：10.3290/j.qi.b1244373）。
