Fu Xiao-Jiao, Liu Min, Shi Jun-Yu, Deng Ke, Lai Hong-Chang, Gu Wen, Zhang Xiao-Meng
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Implantology, Shanghai PerioImplant Innovation Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, National Center for Stomatology, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Shanghai Research Institute of Stomatology, Shanghai, China.
Division of Periodontology and Implant Dentistry, The Faulty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2025 Jan;36(1):17-27. doi: 10.1111/clr.14353. Epub 2024 Sep 4.
This study aimed to compare the accuracy of digital complete-arch implant impressions with prefabricated aids using three intraoral scanners (IOSs) and explore the correlation between virtual deviation measurement and physical framework misfit.
Four edentulous maxillary master models with four and six parallel and angular implants were fabricated and scanned by a laboratory scanner as reference scans. Ten scans of each master model were acquired using three IOSs (IOS-T, IOS-M, and IOS-A) with and without prefabricated aids. Trueness and precision of root mean square (RMS) errors were measured. Ten aluminum alloy frameworks were fabricated, and the misfit was measured with a micro-computed tomography scan with one screw tightened.
Trueness and precision showed significant improvement when prefabricated aids were used for all three IOSs (p < 0.010). Median (interquartile range) RMS errors of trueness reduced from 67.5 (30.4) to 61.8 (30.3) μm, from 100.6 (35.4) to 45.9 (15.1) μm, and from 52.7 (33.2) to 41.1 (22.5) μm for scanner IOS-T, IOS-M, and IOS-A, respectively (p < 0.010). The precision of IOS-A and IOS-M was significantly better than IOS-T when using prefabricated aid (p < 0.001). RMS errors and the maximum marginal misfit of the framework were significantly correlated (p < 0.001, R = 0.845).
With the prefabricated aids, the accuracy of IOSs enhanced significantly in digital complete-arch implant impressions. Three IOSs showed different levels of improvement in accuracy. Virtual RMS errors <62.2 μm could be the clinically acceptable threshold (150 μm) for framework passive fit.
本研究旨在比较使用三种口内扫描仪（IOS）并借助预制辅助工具获取的数字化全牙弓种植体印模的准确性，并探讨虚拟偏差测量与实体支架不贴合之间的相关性。
制作了四个上颌无牙颌主模型，分别带有四个和六个平行及成角度的种植体，并用实验室扫描仪进行扫描作为参考扫描。使用三种IOS（IOS-T、IOS-M和IOS-A）在有和没有预制辅助工具的情况下对每个主模型进行十次扫描。测量均方根（RMS）误差的准确性和精确性。制作十个铝合金支架，在拧紧一个螺钉的情况下用微型计算机断层扫描测量不贴合度。
当对所有三种IOS使用预制辅助工具时，准确性和精确性均有显著提高（p < 0.010）。扫描仪IOS-T、IOS-M和IOS-A的准确性RMS误差中位数（四分位间距）分别从67.5（30.4）μm降至61.8（30.3）μm、从100.6（35.4）μm降至45.9（15.1）μm以及从52.7（33.2）μm降至41.1（22.5）μm（p < 0.010）。使用预制辅助工具时，IOS-A和IOS-M的精确性显著优于IOS-T（p < 0.001）。支架的RMS误差与最大边缘不贴合度显著相关（p < 0.001，R = 0.845）。
借助预制辅助工具，IOS在数字化全牙弓种植体印模中的准确性显著提高。三种IOS在准确性方面表现出不同程度的改善。虚拟RMS误差<62.2μm可能是支架被动贴合的临床可接受阈值（150μm）。
