Jiang N, Bao X D, Yue L
Department of Cariology and Endodontology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center for Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China.
Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2023 Feb 9;58(2):158-164. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112144-20220622-00340.
To explore the effect of scanning methods on finish line trueness of the full crown preparation. The standard full crown preparation model of the right maxillary first molars was prepared by using the maxillary standard resin dentition model. The standard preparation was scanned by imetric scanner and data were used as the true value. CEREC Omnicam and 3Shape TRIOS were used to scan the standard preparation. According to the scanning methods, they were divided into parallel scanning group, occlusal wave scanning group and buccolingual wave scanning group. Each group was scanned repeatedly 6 times. The data were imported into Geomagic Studio 2013 software, and the local finish line image data of the mesial, distal, buccal and lingual regions of the full crown preparation were extracted respectively. Three-dimensional deviation analysis was performed with the reference true value, and the root- mean-square error (RMSE) was the evaluation index of scanning trueness. The statistical method was one-way ANOVA. Parallel scanning group: in general, the RMSE value of complete finish lines of scanner B [(35±6) μm] was significantly lower than that of scanner A [(44±7) μm](<0.05). After scanner A occlusal wave scanning, the RMSE values of the mesial and distal finish lines [(33±5) and (50±12) μm] were significantly lower than those of parallel scanning group (<0.05). After buccal and lingual wave scanning, the RMSE values of local finish lines in the mesial, distal, buccal and lingual regions [(37±3), (50±6), (28±6) and (29±8) μm] were significantly lower than those in parallel scanning group [(45±9), (63±7), (38±3) and (40±3) μm] (<0.05). No significant difference was found in the RMSE values of the mesial, distal, buccal and lingual regions of scanner B between parallel scanning group, occlusal wave scanning group and buccolingual scanning group (>0.05). The scanning trueness of the full crown preparation finish line obtained by the active triangulation scanning equipment can be improved by changing the scanning method to wave scanning.
探讨扫描方式对全冠预备体边缘线真实性的影响。采用上颌标准树脂牙列模型制备右侧上颌第一磨牙标准全冠预备体模型。用imetric扫描仪对标准预备体进行扫描，所得数据作为真值。使用CEREC Omnicam和3Shape TRIOS对标准预备体进行扫描。根据扫描方式，将其分为平行扫描组、咬合面波浪扫描组和颊舌面波浪扫描组。每组重复扫描6次。将数据导入Geomagic Studio 2013软件，分别提取全冠预备体近中、远中、颊侧和舌侧区域的局部边缘线图像数据。以参考真值进行三维偏差分析，以均方根误差（RMSE）作为扫描真实性的评价指标。统计方法采用单因素方差分析。平行扫描组：总体上，扫描仪B完整边缘线的RMSE值[（35±6）μm]显著低于扫描仪A[（44±7）μm]（<0.05）。扫描仪A进行咬合面波浪扫描后，近中及远中边缘线的RMSE值[（33±5）和（50±12）μm]显著低于平行扫描组（<0.05）。颊舌面波浪扫描后，近中、远中、颊侧和舌侧区域局部边缘线的RMSE值[（37±3）、（50±6）、（28±6）和（29±8）μm]显著低于平行扫描组[（45±9）、（63±7）、（38±3）和（40±3）μm]（<0.05）。扫描仪B近中、远中、颊侧和舌侧区域的RMSE值在平行扫描组、咬合面波浪扫描组和颊舌面扫描组之间差异无统计学意义（>0.05）。通过将扫描方式改为波浪扫描，主动三角测量扫描设备获得的全冠预备体边缘线的扫描真实性可得到提高。
