Chen J K, Sun Y C, Chen H, Cao Y, Ke Y F, Zhou Y S
Center of Digital Dentistry, Faculty of Prosthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Research Center of Engineering and Technology for Computerized Dentistry Ministry of Health & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China.
Department of Prosthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China.
Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2021 Sep 9;56(9):920-925. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112144-20210130-00048.
To establish a standard method to evaluate the scanning accuracy of intraoral scanner (IOS) and to investigate six IOS's scanning accuracy and the relationship between different scan span. Five simplified six abutments full arch model were fabricated by high accuracy (5 μm) milling machine with 7075 aluminum alloy. The machining accuracy, which was verified by a coordinate measuring machine with higher accuracy (0.7 μm), was considered as the reference accuracy. The model with the highest machining accuracy was considered as the test model in IOS's scanning accuracy test, and computer-aided design (CAD) data of the model was used as the reference data. Six IOS scanned the test model 10 times with the same scanning path, obtained 60 test data. CAD data and test data were input into Geomagic Studio 2014. The preparation part above the margin of the abutments of the data was isolated and divided into 4 segments of interest: single crown, three-unit bridge, five-unit bridge, and full arch. The test data were then best-fit aligned to CAD data or each other followed by deviation analysis. Scanning trueness and precision were then calculated. The mid-value of scanning trueness and precision of six IOS in single crown, three-unit bridge, five-unit bridge and full arch were 13.3-29.6 μm and 7.6-20.7 μm, 15.4-30.9 μm and 8.7-26.5 μm, 17.0-66.1 μm and 11.3-44.2 μm, 24.0-107.9 μm and 24.6-150.1 μm respectively. Long-span scanning can affect the accuracy of IOS to a varying extent.
建立一种评估口腔内扫描仪(IOS)扫描精度的标准方法,并研究6种IOS的扫描精度以及不同扫描跨度之间的关系。使用高精度(5μm)铣床用7075铝合金制作5个简化的六基台全牙弓模型。通过精度更高(0.7μm)的坐标测量机验证的加工精度被视为参考精度。在IOS扫描精度测试中,将加工精度最高的模型视为测试模型,并将该模型的计算机辅助设计(CAD)数据用作参考数据。6种IOS以相同的扫描路径对测试模型进行10次扫描,获得60组测试数据。将CAD数据和测试数据输入Geomagic Studio 2014。分离数据中基台边缘上方的预备部分,并将其分为4个感兴趣的部分:单冠、三单位桥、五单位桥和全牙弓。然后将测试数据与CAD数据或彼此进行最佳拟合对齐,随后进行偏差分析。接着计算扫描真实性和精度。6种IOS在单冠、三单位桥、五单位桥和全牙弓中的扫描真实性和精度的中值分别为13.3 - 29.6μm和7.6 - 20.7μm、15.4 - 30.9μm和8.7 - 26.5μm、17.0 - 66.1μm和11.3 - 44.2μm、24.0 - 107.9μm和24.6 - 150.1μm。大跨度扫描会在不同程度上影响IOS的精度。