Suppr超能文献

三种口腔内扫描仪在全牙弓种植体支持式修复体印模记录中的准确性:一项体外研究。

Accuracy of 3 Intraoral Scanners in Recording Impressions for Full Arch Dental Implant-Supported Prosthesis: An In Vitro Study.

作者信息

Jain Saurabh, Sayed Mohammed E, Khawaji Reem Abdullah A, Hakami Ghada Ali J, Solan Eman Hassan M, Daish Manal A, Jokhadar Hossam F, AlResayes Saad Saleh, Altoman Majed S, Alshehri Abdullah Hasan, Alqahtani Saeed M, Alamri Mohammad, Alshahrani Ahid Amer, Al-Najjar Hind Ziyad, Mattoo Khurshid

机构信息

Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.

Intern Clinic, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.

出版信息

Med Sci Monit. 2024 Dec 8;30:e946624. doi: 10.12659/MSM.946624.

Abstract

BACKGROUND This study used an edentulous mandibular resin model with 6 parallel osteotomy sites and aimed to compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of 10 digital impressions using 3 intraoral scanners, the 3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan, using Medit Link v3.3.2 software. MATERIAL AND METHODS A model simulating a patient's lower jaw was surgically prepared at 6 parallel sites (implant osteotomy), allowing placement of 6 implant analogues. Matrix-Direct transfer abutments were attached to the analogs, and a reference scan was obtained using a CeramilMap 600 extraoral scanner. Three intraoral scanners (3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan) made 10 digital impressions of each model. The data obtained were superimposed and compared using software (Medit Link 3.3.2) to evaluate accuracy. Mean values were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test. Differences were considered significant at a P value of less than 0.05. RESULTS The TRIOS 5 intraoral scanner displayed the lowest deviation for precision (37.8±4.53 μm) and trueness (54.9±11 μm), followed by Medit i700 (precision 40.6±4.17 μm, trueness 60.5±10.9 μm), whereas the highest deviation (precision: 49.1±8.31 μm, trueness: 72.3±10.4 μm) was reported when Primescan intraoral scanner was used for recording impressions of full arch implants. When the 3 intraoral scanners were compared, a statistically significant difference was observed in terms of precision (P<0.005) and trueness (P<0.005). CONCLUSIONS TRIOS 5 intraoral scanner displayed the lowest deviation values for precision and trueness (more accurate), followed by Medit i700 and Primescan intraoral scanners. However, deviation values of all scanners were within clinically acceptable limits.

摘要

背景 本研究使用了一个具有6个平行截骨部位的无牙下颌树脂模型,旨在比较使用3款口内扫描仪(3Shape TRIOS 5、Medit i700和Primescan)并借助Medit Link v3.3.2软件进行的10次数字印模的准确性(真实性和精确性)。

材料与方法 制作一个模拟患者下颌的模型,在6个平行部位进行手术准备(种植体截骨),以便放置6个种植体代型。将基质直接转移基台连接到代型上,并使用CeramilMap 600口外扫描仪获取参考扫描图像。三款口内扫描仪(3Shape TRIOS 5、Medit i700和Primescan)对每个模型进行10次数字印模。使用软件(Medit Link 3.3.2)对获取的数据进行叠加和比较,以评估准确性。使用单因素方差分析和事后Tukey检验对均值进行统计分析。P值小于0.05时差异被认为具有统计学意义。

结果 TRIOS 5口内扫描仪在精确性(37.8±4.53μm)和真实性(54.9±11μm)方面显示出最低偏差,其次是Medit i700(精确性40.6±4.17μm,真实性60.5±10.9μm),而使用Primescan口内扫描仪记录全牙弓种植体印模时偏差最高(精确性:49.1±8.31μm,真实性:72.3±10.4μm)。当对这三款口内扫描仪进行比较时,在精确性(P<0.005)和真实性(P<0.005)方面观察到具有统计学意义的差异。

结论 TRIOS 5口内扫描仪在精确性和真实性方面显示出最低偏差值(更准确),其次是Medit i700和Primescan口内扫描仪。然而,所有扫描仪的偏差值均在临床可接受范围内。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ccae/11636004/c091cb67f883/medscimonit-30-e946624-g001.jpg

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