Suppr超能文献

扫描技术对无牙上颌骨口腔内扫描系统准确性和速度的影响:一项体外研究。

Influence of scan technology on the accuracy and speed of intraoral scanning systems for the edentulous maxilla: An in vitro study.

作者信息

Osman Reham Bassuni, Alharbi Nawal Murshed

机构信息

Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.

Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

出版信息

J Prosthodont. 2023 Dec;32(9):821-828. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13633. Epub 2023 Jan 11.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the accuracy of three intraoral scanners in terms of trueness and precision relative to the scanner acquisition technology and scan capture mode. Scan speed of each scanner was also evaluated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An edentulous maxillary arch was digitized (reference model) and 3D-printed using an SLA-based 3D-printer (XFAB; DWS, Italy) (n = 10). Each model was scanned using three intraoral scanners, each with different scan technologies: confocal (Trios 3; 3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark), parallel confocal (iTero; Align Technology), and triangulation (Medit i700). Scan time and scanning accuracy (trueness and precision) were calculated using digital subtraction technique (Geomagic Control X v2020, 3DSystems, USA). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was used to detect differences in trueness, precision, and scanning time between the tested groups (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

ANOVA results showed statistically significant differences in trueness, precision, and scan time among the tested groups. Confocal scanning technique (Trios 3) showed the highest trueness and precision (root mean square estimate [RMSE] 0.094 and 0.096, respectively) followed by iTero displaying parallel confocal technique (RMSE 0.113 and 0.133, respectively); the difference was not significant (p = 0.849, p = 0.488). Further, Trios showed the longest scanning time (100 s) compared to iTero and Medit i700 (p = 0.011 and 0.002, respectively). Medit i700 presenting triangulation scan technology revealed lowest trueness and precision (RMSE 0.268) (p = 0.000, p = 0.001) and fastest scan time (59 s) close to iTero (66 s) (p = 0.802).

CONCLUSIONS

Scanner technology had an influence on the accuracy and scan speed of the acquired intraoral scans. The Trios 3 scanner featuring the confocal acquisition technology displayed the highest trueness, precision, and longest scan time. Medit i700 IOS with triangulation acquisition concept featured the lowest trueness, precision, and fastest scan speed. There is no ideal scanner with the best combination of accuracy and scan speed.

摘要

目的

比较三款口腔内扫描仪在与扫描仪采集技术和扫描捕获模式相关的准确性和精密度方面的表现。还对各扫描仪的扫描速度进行了评估。

材料与方法

使用基于SLA的3D打印机(XFAB;意大利DWS公司)对无牙上颌牙弓进行数字化处理(参考模型)并3D打印(n = 10)。使用三款口腔内扫描仪对每个模型进行扫描,各扫描仪具有不同的扫描技术:共聚焦(Trios 3;丹麦哥本哈根3Shape公司)、平行共聚焦(iTero;Align Technology公司)和三角测量(Medit i700)。使用数字减法技术(美国3DSystems公司的Geomagic Control X v2020)计算扫描时间和扫描准确性(准确性和精密度)。采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)检验来检测测试组之间在准确性、精密度和扫描时间方面的差异(p < 0.05)。

结果

ANOVA结果显示,测试组之间在准确性、精密度和扫描时间方面存在统计学上的显著差异。共聚焦扫描技术(Trios 3)显示出最高的准确性和精密度(均方根估计值[RMSE]分别为0.094和0.096),其次是采用平行共聚焦技术的iTero(RMSE分别为0.113和0.133);差异不显著(p = 0.849,p = 0.488)。此外,与iTero和Medit i700相比,Trios的扫描时间最长(100秒)(p分别为0.011和0.002)。采用三角测量扫描技术的Medit i700显示出最低的准确性和精密度(RMSE为0.268)(p = 0.000,p = 0.001),且扫描时间最快(59秒),接近iTero(66秒)(p = 0.802)。

结论

扫描仪技术对所获取的口腔内扫描的准确性和扫描速度有影响。采用共聚焦采集技术的Trios 3扫描仪显示出最高的准确性、精密度和最长的扫描时间。采用三角测量采集概念的Medit i700口腔内扫描仪的准确性、精密度最低,但扫描速度最快。不存在准确性和扫描速度最佳组合的理想扫描仪。

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