Suppr超能文献

体内全弓种植体数字化印模:三种光学印模系统精度的比较。

In Vivo Complete-Arch Implant Digital Impressions: Comparison of the Precision of Three Optical Impression Systems.

机构信息

Faculty of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Department of Clinical Dentistry, Universidad Europea de Madrid, 28670 Madrid, Spain.

Department of Implantology and Prosthetic Dentistry, Academic Center for Dentistry Amsterdam ACTA, 1081 LA Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Apr 3;19(7):4300. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19074300.

Abstract

(1) Multiple in vitro studies reported insufficient accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs) for complete-arch multiple implant impression. The aim of the study is to analyze the precision of three IOSs, PIC dental (Pic dental, Iditec North West SL), TRIOS 3 (3Shape), and True Definition (Midmark Corporation) and the influence of several factors in the edentulous complete maxillary and mandibular arch. (2) A fully edentulous patient with eight implants in the maxillary and in the mandibular jaw was selected. Five impressions were taken per system and arch. A suprastructure was designed on each digital working cast. The precision was analyzed comparing each of the 28 distances and seven relative angulations of the abutments of all the designed suprastructures. The descriptive statistics, the Student's -test, and the ANOVA test were used to analyze the data (α = 0.05). (3) Significant differences were observed when comparing the IOSs in some of the distances and angulations. (4) The increase in the distance between implants affected the precision of T and TD but not the PIC system. The type of arch did not affect the PIC precision, but the T and TD systems performed worse in the mandibular arch. The system with the best precision was the PIC, followed by TD, and then T.

摘要

(1) 多项体外研究报告表明,口腔内扫描仪(IOS)在全颌多种植体印模方面的准确性不足。本研究旨在分析三种 IOS(PIC dental [Pic dental, Iditec North West SL]、TRIOS 3 [3Shape] 和 True Definition [Midmark Corporation])的精度及其在无牙颌上颌和下颌全弓中的几个因素的影响。

(2) 选择一位上颌和下颌各有 8 个种植体的完全无牙患者。每个系统和弓部采集 5 个印模。在每个数字工作模型上设计一个上部结构。通过比较所有设计的上部结构的每个支台间的 28 个距离和 7 个相对角度来分析精度。使用描述性统计、Student's -test 和 ANOVA 检验来分析数据(α = 0.05)。

(3) 在一些距离和角度方面,IOS 之间的比较存在显著差异。

(4) 种植体之间距离的增加会影响 T 和 TD 的精度,但不会影响 PIC 系统。弓型不影响 PIC 精度,但 T 和 TD 系统在下颌弓部的性能较差。精度最好的系统是 PIC,其次是 TD,然后是 T。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8529/8998197/ffeb7627230f/ijerph-19-04300-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