Complete-arch accuracy of seven intraoral scanners measured by the virtual-fit method

被引:1
|
作者
Borbola, Daniel [1 ]
Mikolicz, Akos [1 ]
Romanszky, Laszlo [2 ]
Sersli, Gyorgy [2 ]
DeFee, Michael [3 ]
Renne, Walter [3 ]
Vag, Janos [1 ]
机构
[1] Semmelweis Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Restorat Dent & Endodont, Szentkiralyi Utca 47, H-1088 Budapest, Hungary
[2] Artifex Dentis Kft, Dent Technicians, Revay utca 12, H-1065 Budapest, Hungary
[3] Modern Optimized Dent Inst, 320 Broad St 210, Charleston, SC 29401 USA
基金
匈牙利科学研究基金会;
关键词
CAD-CAM; Accuracy; Intraoral scanner; Marginal gap; Internal fit; Digital impression; IMPRESSIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105281
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives: This study compared the accuracy of seven intraoral scanners (IOS) by the virtual-fit method. Methods: Four maxillary arches with tooth abutments were scanned with an industrial reference scanner (n=1) and by Aoralscan3, EmeraldS, Helios600, Lumina, Mediti700, Primescan, and Trios5 IOSs (each n=12). Two complete-arch fixed frameworks were designed on each IOS scan with a 70 mu m (group 70) and a 90 mu m internal cement space (group 70+20, additional 20 mu m at the margin). The virtual-fit method was comprised of superimposing the framework designs onto the reference scan using a non-penetrating algorithm simulating the clinical try-in. Internal and marginal gaps were measured. Precision was estimated by the mean absolute errors (MAE). Results: In group 70, Mediti700 (43 mu m), Primescan (42 mu m), and EmeraldS were in the best homogenous subset for the marginal gap, followed by the Lumina (67 mu m), Aoralscan3 (70 mu m), and Trios5 (70 mu m), whereas Helios600 (118 mu m) was in the third subset. Based on the MAE at the margin, Mediti700, Trios5, and EmeraldS were in the first-best homogenous subset, followed by Primescan. Lumina and Helios600 were in the third subset, and Aoralscan3 was in the fourth subset. In group 70+20, the marginal gap was significantly decreased for Lumina and Aoralscan3, whereas MAE significantly decreased for EmeraldS and Aoralscan3. The rank of IOSs was similar for the internal gap. Conclusion: EmeraldS, Mediti700, Primescan, and Trios5 meet the marginal and internal fit criteria for fixed tooth-borne complete arch restorations. Increasing the cement space during design could enhance restoration fit. Clinical significance: The virtual-fit alignment method can effectively evaluate the accuracy of different intraoral scanners, offering valuable clinical guidance for distinguishing among them. Recent software and hardware versions of long-standing IOS manufacturers are suitable for fabricating complete arch restoration.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Complete-arch accuracy of intraoral scanners
    Treesh, Joshua C.
    Liacouras, Peter C.
    Taft, Robert M.
    Brooks, Daniel, I
    Raiciulescu, Sorana
    Ellert, Daniel O.
    Grant, Gerald T.
    Ye, Ling
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2018, 120 (03): : 382 - 388
  • [2] Complete-Arch Accuracy of Four Intraoral Scanners: An In Vitro Study
    Celeghin, Giordano
    Franceschetti, Giulio
    Mobilio, Nicola
    Fasiol, Alberto
    Catapano, Santo
    Corsalini, Massimo
    Grande, Francesco
    HEALTHCARE, 2021, 9 (03)
  • [3] Influence of ambient light conditions on the accuracy and scanning time of seven intraoral scanners in complete-arch implant scans
    Ochoa-Lopez, Gaston
    Cascos, Rocio
    Antonaya-Martin, Jose Luis
    Revilla-Leon, Marta
    Gomez-Polo, Miguel
    JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2022, 121
  • [4] Evaluation of the accuracy of seven intraoral scanners for the full dentate and partially edentulous complete-arch mandibular casts: An in vitro comparison
    Wang, Xin
    Zhang, Fang
    Ma, Dan
    Ye, Xiaolan
    Zheng, Xiaojuan
    Ren, Ruifang
    Ren, Nan
    Bai, Shizhu
    HELIYON, 2024, 10 (10)
  • [5] Accuracy of 9 intraoral scanners for complete-arch image acquisition: A qualitative and quantitative evaluation
    Kim, Ryan Jin-Young
    Park, Ji-Man
    Shim, June-Sung
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2018, 120 (06): : 895 - +
  • [6] Influence of Implant ScanBody Material and Intraoral Scanners on the Accuracy of Complete-Arch Digital Implant Impressions
    Azevedo, Luis
    Marques, Tiago
    Karasan, Duygu
    Fehmer, Vincent
    Sailer, Irena
    Correia, Andre
    Polo, Miguel Gomez
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS, 2024, 37 (05)
  • [7] Effect of Scan Pattern on the Accuracy of Complete-Arch Digital Implant Impressions with Two Intraoral Scanners
    Li, Zhipeng
    Huang, Ruoxuan
    Wu, Xiayi
    Chen, Zetao
    Huang, Baoxin
    Chen, Zhuofan
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2022, 37 (04) : 731 - 739
  • [8] Comparison of Different Intraoral Scanners With Prefabricated Aid on Accuracy and Framework Passive Fit of Digital Complete-Arch Implant Impression: An In Vitro Study
    Fu, Xiao-Jiao
    Liu, Min
    Shi, Jun-Yu
    Deng, Ke
    Lai, Hong-Chang
    Gu, Wen
    Zhang, Xiao-Meng
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2025, 36 (01) : 17 - 27
  • [9] Influence of operator experience on the complete-arch accuracy and time-based efficiency of three intraoral scanners
    Lin, Wei-Chun
    Lee, Chian-Chuen
    Lee, Sheng-Yang
    Peng, Chiao-Yun
    Lin, Chia-Cheng
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL SCIENCES, 2025, 20 (01) : 620 - 625
  • [10] Evaluation of the accuracy of intraoral scanners for complete-arch scanning: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
    Vitai, Viktoria
    Nemeth, Anna
    Solyom, Eleonora
    Czumbel, Laszlo Mark
    Szabo, Bence
    Fazekas, Reka
    Gerber, Gabor
    Hegyi, Peter
    Hermann, Peter
    Borbely, Judit
    JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2023, 137