Suppr超能文献

上颌全口四颗种植体支持式固定义齿修复中传统印模与数字化扫描的准确性和精密度评估:一项体外研究

Evaluation of the trueness and precision of conventional impressions versus digital scans for the all-on-four treatment in the maxillary arch: An in vitro study.

作者信息

Marshaha Nour Jamal, Azhari Amr Ahmed, Assery Mansour K, Ahmed Walaa Magdy

机构信息

Graduate Prosthodontics, Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Riyadh Elm University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

出版信息

J Prosthodont. 2024 Feb;33(2):171-179. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13666. Epub 2023 Mar 13.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the accuracy of digitizing conventional impressions to intraoral surface scans for all-on-four treatment in the maxillary arch.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An edentulous maxillary arch model with four implants placed in an all-on-four design was fabricated. Intraoral surface scans (n = 10) were obtained using an intraoral scanner after scan body insertion. For conventional polyvinylsiloxane impressions of the model, implant copings were inserted into the implant fixation for implant level, opened tray impressions (n = 10). The model and conventional impressions were digitized to obtain digital files. A reference file was created using a laboratory-scanned conventional standard tessellation language (STL) file with analog to scan the body using exocad software. STL datasets from the two digital and conventional impression groups were superimposed with reference files to assess the 3D deviations. Two-way ANOVA and paired-samples t-test was performed to assess the difference in trueness and examine the effects of impression technique and implant angulation on the deviation amount.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the conventional impression and intraoral surface scan groups F(1, 76) = 2.705, p = 0.104. No significant differences were found between conventional straight and digital straight implants and between conventional and digital tilted implants F(1, 76) = .041, p = 0.841. No significant differences were found between conventional straight and conventional tilted implants p = 0.07 and between digital straight and digital tilted implants p = 0.08.

CONCLUSION

Digital scans were more accurate than conventional impressions. The digital straight implants were more accurate than the conventional straight implants, and the digital tilted implants were more accurate than the conventional tilted implants, with higher accuracy for digital straight implants.

摘要

目的

比较在上颌全口种植修复中,传统印模数字化与口内表面扫描的准确性。

材料与方法

制作一个采用全口四颗种植体设计的无牙上颌牙弓模型。在植入扫描体后,使用口内扫描仪获取口内表面扫描数据(n = 10)。对于模型的传统聚醚橡胶印模,将种植体基台帽插入种植体固定部位以获取种植体水平的开放托盘印模(n = 10)。对模型和传统印模进行数字化处理以获得数字文件。使用实验室扫描的传统标准镶嵌语言(STL)文件创建一个参考文件,并使用exocad软件对扫描体进行模拟扫描。将来自两个数字印模组和传统印模组的STL数据集与参考文件进行叠加,以评估三维偏差。进行双向方差分析和配对样本t检验,以评估准确性的差异,并检验印模技术和种植体角度对偏差量的影响。

结果

传统印模组与口内表面扫描组之间未发现显著差异,F(1, 76) = 2.705,p = 0.104。传统直型种植体与数字直型种植体之间以及传统倾斜种植体与数字倾斜种植体之间未发现显著差异,F(1, 76) = 0.041,p = 0.841。传统直型种植体与传统倾斜种植体之间(p = 0.07)以及数字直型种植体与数字倾斜种植体之间(p = 0.08)未发现显著差异。

结论

数字扫描比传统印模更准确。数字直型种植体比传统直型种植体更准确,数字倾斜种植体比传统倾斜种植体更准确,数字直型种植体的准确性更高。

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