Abouseif Abanoub M, Abdelkader Sanaa H, Abdelraheem Islam M
Postgraduate Student, Division of Fixed Prosthodontics, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt; Teaching Assistant of Fixed Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Arab Academy for Science and Technology and Maritime Transport (AASTMT), El-Alamein, Egypt.
Professor, Division of Fixed Prosthodontics, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
J Dent. 2025 Apr;155:105651. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105651. Epub 2025 Feb 25.
This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the depth, trueness, and scanning time of intraoral scans for post spaces using four different intraoral scanners.
A human maxillary canine was decoronated, endodontically treated, and prepared for a post space to a depth of 18 mm. Four intraoral scanners: Primescan (PS), Cerec Omnicam (OC), Medit i700 (MD), and Carestream 3700 (CS), were used to scan the post space (n = 15). A reference scan was obtained using a conventional polyvinyl siloxane impression, which was then scanned with a desktop scanner. All scans were converted to STL files and analyzed in a 3D inspection program to evaluate depth and trueness, measured by root mean square (RMS) calculations. Data analysis involved one-way ANOVA, followed by Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons.
PS achieved the greatest depth (18.07 mm), followed by MD (9.96 mm), CS (7.31 mm), and OC (7.13 mm), with significant differences observed among the scanners (P < 0.001). Significant differences in RMS values were also found (P < 0.001). The highest RMS value at a depth of 6.5 mm was recorded for OC (31.33 ± 3.44) and CS (30.93 ± 3.65), followed by PS (20.41 ± 3.65), with MD having the lowest RMS value (18.84 ± 3.22). At a depth of 9.5 mm, a significant difference was observed between PS and MD (P < 0.001), with PS showing the lowest RMS value (18.12 ± 2.20) compared to MD (25.80 ± 2.45). Regarding scanning time, PS was the fastest (33.67 s), followed by CS, MD, and OC.
The PS scanner demonstrated the greatest scan depth, trueness, and the shortest scanning time. In contrast, OC and CS captured the least depth and trueness, limited to 7.1 and 7.3 mm, respectively.
The PS scanner is recommended for scanning depths exceeding 10 mm, while the MD is suitable for depths less than 10 mm. OC and CS may be effective for scanning depths limited to 7 mm.
本体外研究旨在使用四种不同的口腔内扫描仪评估桩核预备空间的扫描深度、准确性和扫描时间。
选取一颗人类上颌尖牙，去除冠部，进行根管治疗，并预备深度为18mm的桩核空间。使用四种口腔内扫描仪：Primescan（PS）、Cerec Omnicam（OC）、Medit i700（MD）和Carestream 3700（CS）对桩核空间进行扫描（n = 15）。通过传统的聚乙烯基硅氧烷印模获得参考扫描，然后用台式扫描仪进行扫描。所有扫描均转换为STL文件，并在三维检测程序中进行分析，以评估深度和准确性，通过均方根（RMS）计算进行测量。数据分析采用单因素方差分析，随后进行Bonferroni校正的两两比较。
PS的扫描深度最大（18.07mm），其次是MD（9.96mm）、CS（7.31mm）和OC（7.13mm），扫描仪之间存在显著差异（P < 0.001）。RMS值也存在显著差异（P < 0.001）。在6.5mm深度处，OC（31.33 ± 3.44）和CS（30.93 ± 3.65）的RMS值最高，其次是PS（20.41 ± 3.65），MD的RMS值最低（18.84 ± 3.22）。在9.5mm深度处，PS和MD之间观察到显著差异（P < 0.001），与MD（25.80 ± 2.45）相比，PS的RMS值最低（18.12 ± 2.20）。关于扫描时间，PS最快（33.67秒），其次是CS、MD和OC。
PS扫描仪显示出最大的扫描深度、准确性和最短的扫描时间。相比之下，OC和CS捕获的深度和准确性最低，分别限制在7.1mm和7.3mm。
对于扫描深度超过10mm的情况，推荐使用PS扫描仪，而MD适用于深度小于10mm的情况。OC和CS可能对扫描深度限制在7mm有效。
