基于软件和操作人员的不同，比较数字化种植体扫描中的测量偏差。
Comparison of measured deviations in digital implant scans depending on software and operator.
机构信息
Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.; Istinye University, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkey.
出版信息
J Dent. 2022 Jul;122:104154. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104154. Epub 2022 May 5.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the effect of 3-dimensional (3D) analysis software and operator on the measured deviations in implant scans.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A combined healing abutment-scan body (CHA-SB) system was digitized with an industrial scanner (ATOS Core 80) to generate a master standard tessellation language file (MRM-STL) and an intraoral scanner (TRIOS 3) to generate 9 test-scan STL files, which were transferred into metrology-grade (Geomagic Control X, GX and GOM Inspect, GM) and nonmetrology-grade (Medit Link, ML) software for deviation analysis. Test-scan STLs were superimposed over MRM-STL and 2 planes passing through the center of the SB were generated. Distance deviations at 8 points on these planes were analyzed by two different operators with similar level of experience. Data were analyzed with analysis of variance and F tests (α=.05).
RESULTS
Only model 1 (P=.049) analyzed by operator 2 showed significant differences among tested software, and the highest deviations were measured with GM (P≤.037). However, the difference in values measured with GX and ML was nonsignificant (P=.91). Operator correlation was high (ICC≥.712, P≤.011), except for models 1 (GM, ICC=-.335, P=.813), 2 (GM, ICC=.025, P=.468 and ML, ICC=-.013, P=.507), 6 (GM, ICC=-.085, P=.583), and 8 (GM, ICC=-.386, P=.85).
CONCLUSION
The measured deviations in implant scans in all models, except for one, were similar among the tested software, regardless of the operator. The inter-rater reliability of operators while using tested 3D analysis software was overall high. When observed, low inter-rater reliability was mostly with only one of the metrology grade software.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Nonmetrology-grade 3D analysis software may be a suitable alternative to metrology-grade software to measure the deviations in digital implant scan body scans. When GOM metrology-software is used, measured deviations in implant scan body scans may vary more across operators.
目的
研究 3 维（3D）分析软件和操作人员对种植体扫描测量偏差的影响。
材料和方法
采用工业扫描仪（ATOS Core 80）对组合愈合基台-扫描体（CHA-SB）系统进行数字化，生成主标准 tessellation 语言文件（MRM-STL），采用口腔内扫描仪（TRIOS 3）生成 9 个测试扫描 STL 文件，将其传输到计量级（Geomagic Control X，GX 和 GOM Inspect，GM）和非计量级（Medit Link，ML）软件中进行偏差分析。将测试扫描 STL 叠加在 MRM-STL 上，并生成穿过 SB 中心的 2 个平面。由两名经验水平相似的操作人员分析这些平面上 8 个点的距离偏差。采用方差分析和 F 检验（α=.05）对数据进行分析。
结果
仅模型 1（P=.049）由操作人员 2 分析显示，测试软件之间存在显著差异，GM 测量的偏差最大（P≤.037）。然而，GX 和 ML 测量值之间的差异无统计学意义（P=.91）。操作人员相关性较高（ICC≥.712，P≤.011），除模型 1（GM，ICC=-.335，P=.813）、2（GM，ICC=.025，P=.468 和 ML，ICC=-.013，P=.507）、6（GM，ICC=-.085，P=.583）和 8（GM，ICC=-.386，P=.85）。
结论
除一个模型外，所有模型中种植体扫描的测量偏差在测试软件之间相似，与操作人员无关。操作人员在使用测试 3D 分析软件时的组内可靠性总体较高。当观察到低组内可靠性时，主要是与一个计量级软件有关。
临床意义
非计量级 3D 分析软件可能是计量级软件的合适替代方法，用于测量数字种植体扫描体扫描的偏差。当使用 GOM 计量软件时，种植体扫描体扫描的测量偏差可能会因操作人员的不同而有所不同。
Zotero 插件