Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Biruni University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Istinye University, Istanbul, Turkey; Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
J Dent. 2023 Nov;138:104700. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104700. Epub 2023 Sep 14.
To evaluate the effect of different data acquisition methods on the trueness and precision of mandibular complete-arch implant scans.
An edentulous polyurethane master mandibular model with 6 implants was digitized by using an industrial-grade blue light scanner (ATOS Core 80 5MP) to obtain a master standard tessellation language (MSTL) file. The master model was also digitized by using either direct digital workflow with a stereoscopic camera (iCam 4D (IM)) or intraoral scanners (CEREC Primescan (PS) and Trios 4 (T4)) or indirect digital workflow with laboratory scanners (inEos X5 (X5) and CARES 7 (S7)) to obtain test-scan STLs (n = 10). All STL files were imported into a metrology-grade analysis software (Geomagic Control X 2020.1) and test-scan STLs were superimposed over MSTL. The root mean square method was used to calculate surface deviations, while angular deviations were also calculated. Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's tests were used to evaluate measured deviations (surface and angular) for trueness and precision (α = 0.05).
X5 and S7 had the lowest, and IM had the highest surface deviations (P ≤ .036). The angular deviations of PS were lower than those of X5, S7, and IM (P ≤ .008). When surface deviations were considered, T4 had the lowest precision among tested scanners (P ≤ .002), and the scans of IM had higher precision than those of PS (P = .003). Scanner type did not affect the precision of the scans when angular deviations were considered (P = .084).
The data acquisition method affected the trueness (surface and angular deviations) and precision (surface deviations) of mandibular complete-arch implant scans.
Tested data acquisition methods may be feasible to digitize mandibular complete-arch implants considering the deviations of the scans, which were in the range of previously reported thresholds, and the high precision of scans. However, the frameworks fabricated with the direct digital workflow that involves the scans of the stereoscopic camera might require more adjustments than those fabricated by using the scans of other tested scanners.
评估不同数据采集方法对下颌全口种植体扫描的准确性和精密度的影响。
使用工业级蓝光扫描仪（ATOS Core 80 5MP）对无牙颌聚氨酯标准模型进行数字化，以获得主标准 tessellation language（MSTL）文件。还使用直接数字化工作流程（iCam 4D（IM））或口内扫描仪（CEREC Primescan（PS）和 Trios 4（T4））或间接数字化工作流程（inEos X5（X5）和 CARES 7（S7））对模型进行数字化，以获得测试扫描的 STL 文件（n=10）。所有 STL 文件均导入计量级分析软件（Geomagic Control X 2020.1）中，并将测试扫描的 STL 叠加到 MSTL 上。使用均方根法计算表面偏差，同时还计算角度偏差。使用 Kruskal-Wallis 和 Dunn 检验评估准确性和精密度的测量偏差（表面和角度）（α=0.05）。
X5 和 S7 的表面偏差最小，而 IM 的最大（P≤0.036）。PS 的角度偏差低于 X5、S7 和 IM（P≤0.008）。考虑表面偏差时，T4 在测试扫描仪中具有最低的精度（P≤0.002），而 IM 的扫描精度高于 PS（P=0.003）。当考虑角度偏差时，扫描仪类型不影响扫描的精度（P=0.084）。
数据采集方法会影响下颌全口种植体扫描的准确性（表面和角度偏差）和精密度（表面偏差）。
在考虑扫描偏差的情况下，测试的数据采集方法可能适用于数字化下颌全口种植体，因为扫描偏差在之前报道的阈值范围内，并且扫描具有高精度。然而，与使用其他测试扫描仪的扫描相比，涉及立体相机扫描的直接数字化工作流程制造的框架可能需要更多的调整。
