Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
BMC Oral Health. 2024 Nov 14;24(1):1378. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-05151-3.
The expectations for the clinical and laboratory phases of tissue-supported complete dentures (TSCDs) are changing. Currently, there is a trend towards fast, comfortable, reliable, and low-cost methods. In TSCD impressions, simplified impression and digital impression methods involving the use of an intraoral scanner (IOS) are becoming preferable. Given this situation, this study aims to compare different conventional and digital impression methods used in TSCDs.
Patients with maxillary complete edentulism and healthy oral mucosa were included in this study. In the digital group, two different impressions were made using an IOS (Trios4) without (D1) and with (D2) artificial intelligence scanning (AI-Scan). In addition, a modified impression (D3) was made using the IOS in two steps, including the occlusal rim. In the conventional group, a two-step impression (C1) using an individual tray with zinc oxide eugenol and a one-step simplified impression (C2) using a stock tray with irreversible hydrocolloid were made. The comparison groups were determined to be C1-C2, C1-D1, D1-D2, and D1-D3. The best-fit algorithm was used to superimpose the impressions to be compared. The right and left vestibular areas, postdam area, palatal area, right and left matching area, entire surface, and borders were evaluated separately.
Fifteen patients were included in this study. In the C1-C2 group, the mean deviation at the borders was statistically significant (p = 0.01). No regions in the C1-D1 and D1-D3 groups exhibited significant differences in the mean amount of deviation (p > 0,05). In the D1-D2 group, the mean deviation in the palatal area was significant (p = 0,03).
In maxillary edentulism, digital impressions have shown comparable results to conventional impressions, suggesting promising implications for clinical applications.
The clinical trial has been registered (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT06400277, registration date 06/05/2024, 'retrospectively registered').
对组织支持式全口义齿（TSCD）临床和实验室阶段的期望正在发生变化。目前，人们倾向于使用快速、舒适、可靠且低成本的方法。在 TSCD 印模中，简化印模和涉及使用口内扫描仪（IOS）的数字印模方法变得更受欢迎。鉴于这种情况，本研究旨在比较用于 TSCD 的不同传统和数字印模方法。
本研究纳入上颌完全无牙且口腔黏膜健康的患者。在数字组中，使用 IOS（Trios4）进行了两次不同的印模制作，一次无（D1）和一次有（D2）人工智能扫描（AI-Scan）。此外，使用 IOS 分两步制作改良印模（D3），包括咬合边缘。在传统组中，使用带氧化锌丁香酚的个体托盘进行两步印模（C1），使用不可逆水胶体的库存托盘进行一步简化印模（C2）。比较组确定为 C1-C2、C1-D1、D1-D2 和 D1-D3。使用最佳拟合算法对要比较的印模进行叠加。分别评估右侧和左侧颊侧区、后堤区、腭区、右侧和左侧匹配区、整个表面和边缘。
本研究纳入了 15 名患者。在 C1-C2 组中，边缘处的平均偏差具有统计学意义（p=0.01）。C1-D1 和 D1-D3 组中没有区域的平均偏差量有显著差异（p>0.05）。在 D1-D2 组中，腭区的平均偏差具有统计学意义（p=0.03）。
在上颌无牙颌中，数字印模的结果与传统印模相当，这表明其对临床应用具有有前景的意义。
该临床试验已注册（ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT06400277，注册日期 2024 年 6 月 5 日，“回顾性注册”）。
