Saravi Babak, Ilbertz Julia, Vach Kirstin, Kohal Ralf J, Patzelt Sebastian B M
Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Street 55, 79106 Freiburg, Germany.
Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
J Funct Biomater. 2023 Sep 5;14(9):458. doi: 10.3390/jfb14090458.
The use of computerized optical impression making (COIM) for the fabrication of removable dentures for partially edentulous jaws is a rising trend in dental prosthetics. However, the accuracy of this method compared with that of traditional impression-making techniques remains uncertain. We therefore decided to evaluate the accuracy of COIM in the context of partially edentulous jaws in an in vivo setting. Twelve partially edentulous patients with different Kennedy classes underwent both a conventional impression (CI) and a computerized optical impression (COI) procedure. The CI was then digitized and compared with the COI data using 3D analysis software. Four different comparison situations were assessed: Whole Jaw (WJ), Mucosa with Residual Teeth (M_RT), Isolated Mucosa (IM), and Isolated Abutment Teeth (AT). Statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate group differences by quantifying the deviation values between the CIs and COIs. The mean deviations between the COIs and CIs varied significantly across the different comparison situations, with mucosal areas showing higher deviations than dental hard tissue. However, no statistically significant difference was found between the maxilla and mandible. Although COIM offers a no-pressure impression method that captures surfaces without irritation, it was found to capture mucosa less accurately than dental hard tissue. This discrepancy can likely be attributed to software algorithms that automatically filter out mobile tissues. Clinically, these findings suggest that caution is required when using COIM for prosthetics involving mucosal tissues as deviations could compromise the fit and longevity of the prosthetic appliance. Further research is warranted to assess the clinical relevance of these deviations.
在口腔修复学中，使用计算机化光学印模制作（COIM）来制作部分牙列缺失颌骨的可摘义齿是一种日益增长的趋势。然而，与传统印模制作技术相比，这种方法的准确性仍不确定。因此，我们决定在体内环境下评估部分牙列缺失颌骨情况下COIM的准确性。12名不同肯尼迪分类的部分牙列缺失患者接受了传统印模（CI）和计算机化光学印模（COI）程序。然后将CI数字化，并使用3D分析软件与COI数据进行比较。评估了四种不同的比较情况：全颌（WJ）、有残留牙齿的黏膜（M_RT）、孤立黏膜（IM）和孤立基牙（AT）。通过量化CI和COI之间的偏差值进行统计分析，以评估组间差异。COI和CI之间的平均偏差在不同的比较情况下有显著差异，黏膜区域的偏差高于牙齿硬组织。然而，在上颌和下颌之间未发现统计学上的显著差异。尽管COIM提供了一种无压力印模方法，可以在不产生刺激的情况下获取表面，但发现它获取黏膜的准确性低于牙齿硬组织。这种差异可能归因于自动过滤掉移动组织的软件算法。临床上，这些发现表明，在使用COIM进行涉及黏膜组织的修复时需要谨慎，因为偏差可能会影响修复体的贴合度和使用寿命。有必要进行进一步的研究来评估这些偏差的临床相关性。
