Ferrari Raphael, Özcan Mutlu, Wiedemeier Daniel, Essig Harald
Int J Comput Dent. 2025 Sep 1;28(3):225-234. doi: 10.3290/j.ijcd.b5886430.
The present study investigated the accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs) based on different image acquisition technologies in the field of presurgical orthopedic treatment (PSOT) in neonates with cleft palate.
Dental casts of clinical situations representing unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP), bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP), and cleft palate (CP) with reference polyetheretherketone (PEEK) scanbodies (Cares RC Mono Scanbody) were scanned utilizing four IOS systems: Carestream CS3600 (CS), Medit i500 (MD), Cerec Omnicam (CO), and Trios 3 (TS). One calibrated operator made five scans from each model using each IOS (N = 60). Reference digital impressions were obtained by an industrial-grade laboratory scanner (Sirona inEos X5) and superimposed using a best-fit algorithm. The divergence measure was extracted and the scanners were compared in terms of their accuracy using generalized least squares statistical models that account for variance heterogeneity. Additionally, comparative 3D analysis of the scans was performed using reverse engineering software (Geomagic Control X) in order to measure the discrepancy between the intraoral scans and the reference scan in five different anatomical regions of interest (ROIs): alveolar crest (AC), cleft (CL), palate (PL), vestibulum (VS), premaxilla (PM).
The four IOSs showed relevant and significant differences in estimated trueness (P 0.001) and precision (P = 0.009). Among all anatomical models and analyzed ROIs, TS had the best accuracy (trueness: -1.57 µm; precision: 9.41 µm), followed by MD (trueness: -20.63 µm; precision: 29.18 µm), CS (trueness: -40.43 µm; precision: 16.52 µm) and CO (trueness: 81.27 µm; precision: 40.32 µm).
Impression taking of the maxilla in cleft lip and palate patients is challenging for the operator. Relevant and significant differences in trueness and precision were found between the four IOSs. TS showed the best accuracy and was the least influenced under different anatomical ROIs. (Int J Comput Dent 2025;28(3):225-0; doi: 10.3290/j.ijcd.b5886430).
本研究调查了基于不同图像采集技术的口内扫描仪（IOS）在腭裂新生儿术前正畸治疗（PSOT）领域的准确性。
使用四个IOS系统对代表单侧唇腭裂（UCLP）、双侧唇腭裂（BCLP）和腭裂（CP）的临床情况的石膏模型以及参考聚醚醚酮（PEEK）扫描体（Cares RC Mono Scanbody）进行扫描：Carestream CS3600（CS）、Medit i500（MD）、Cerec Omnicam（CO）和Trios 3（TS）。一名经过校准的操作人员使用每个IOS对每个模型进行五次扫描（N = 60）。通过工业级实验室扫描仪（Sirona inEos X5）获得参考数字印模，并使用最佳拟合算法进行叠加。提取差异度量，并使用考虑方差异质性的广义最小二乘统计模型比较扫描仪在准确性方面的差异。此外，使用逆向工程软件（Geomagic Control X）对扫描进行比较3D分析，以测量口内扫描与参考扫描在五个不同的感兴趣解剖区域（ROI）中的差异：牙槽嵴（AC）、裂隙（CL）、腭部（PL）、前庭（VS）、前颌骨（PM）。
四种IOS在估计的真实性（P < 0.001）和精密度（P = 0.009）方面显示出显著差异。在所有解剖模型和分析的ROI中，TS的准确性最高（真实性：-1.57 µm；精密度：9.41 µm），其次是MD（真实性：-20.63 µm；精密度：29.18 µm）、CS（真实性：-40.43 µm；精密度：16.52 µm）和CO（真实性：81.27 µm；精密度：40.32 µm）。
唇腭裂患者上颌印模采集对操作人员来说具有挑战性。四种IOS在真实性和精密度方面存在显著差异。TS显示出最佳的准确性，并且在不同解剖ROI下受影响最小。（《国际计算机牙科杂志》2025年；28(3):225 - 0；doi: 10.3290/j.ijcd.b5886430）
