Effect of different intraoral scanners and scanbody splinting on accuracy of scanning implant-supported full arch fixed prosthesis

被引:5
|
作者
Ashraf, Yasmine [1 ]
Abo El Fadl, Ahmad [1 ]
Hamdy, Amina [1 ]
Ebeid, Kamal [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Ain Shams Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Fixed Prosthodont, Cairo, Egypt
[2] Ain Shams Univ, Fac Dent, Org African Unity St, Cairo, Egypt
关键词
all-on-4; dental implants; digital dentistry; fixed prosthodontics; implant scanbody; MULTIPLE IMPLANTS; TECHNOLOGY; EXPERIENCE;
D O I
10.1111/jerd.13070
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
ObjectiveThis study evaluated the accuracy of different intraoral scanners (IOS) for scanning of implant-supported full arch fixed prosthesis with different implant angulations with and without scanbodies splinting. Materials and MethodsTwo maxillary models were designed and fabricated to receive an all-on-four implant retained. The models were divided into two groups according to the angulation of the posterior implant (Group 1; 30 and Group 2; 45). Each group was then divided into three subgroups according to the type of IOS used: Subgroup C; Primescan, subgroup T; Trios4, and subgroup M; Medit i600. Then each subgroup was divided into two divisions according to scanning technique; division S: splinted and division N: nonsplinted. Ten scans were made by each scanner for every division. Trueness and precision were analyzed using Geomagic controlX analysis software. ResultsAngulation had no significant effect on both the trueness (p = 0.854) and precision (p = 0.347). Splinting had a significant effect on trueness and precision (p < 0.001). Scanner type had a significant effect on trueness (p < 0.001) and precision (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between trueness of Trios 4 (112.15 +/- 12.85) and Primescan (106.75 +/- 22.58). However, there was a significant difference when compared to trueness of Medit i600 (158.50 +/- 27.65). For the precision results Cerec Primescan showed the highest precision (95.45 +/- 33.21). There was a significant difference between the three scanners, precision of Trios4 (109.72 +/- 19.24) and Medit i600 (121.21 +/- 17.26). ConclusionCerec Primescan has higher trueness and precision than Trios 4 and Medit i600 in full arch implants scanning. Splinting the scanbodies improve the accuracy of full arch implants scanning. Clinical SignificanceCerec Primescan and 3Shape Trios 4 can be used for scanning of All-on-four implant supported prosthesis when scanbodies are splinted using a modular chain device.
引用
收藏
页码:1257 / 1263
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Accuracy of different laboratory scanners for scanning of implant-supported full arch fixed prosthesis
    Ebeid, Kamal
    Nouh, Ingy
    Ashraf, Yasmine
    Cesar, Paulo F.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC AND RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2022, 34 (05) : 843 - 848
  • [2] Accuracy of a chairside reverse scanbody workflow for a complete arch implant-supported prosthesis using four intraoral scanners versus a desktop scanner
    Nuytens, Philippe
    Vandeweghe, Stefan
    D'haese, Rani
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2023, 138
  • [3] Intraoral scanning and dental photogrammetry for full-arch implant-supported prosthesis: A technique
    Clozza, Emanuele
    [J]. CLINICAL ADVANCES IN PERIODONTICS, 2023,
  • [4] Full arch digital scanning systems performances for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: a comparative study of 8 intraoral scanners
    Di Fiore, Adolfo
    Meneghello, Roberto
    Graiff, Lorenzo
    Savio, Gianpaolo
    Vigolo, Paolo
    Monaco, Carlo
    Stellini, Edoardo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTIC RESEARCH, 2019, 63 (04) : 396 - 403
  • [5] A Prosthesis Retention System for Full-Arch, Fixed, Implant-Supported Prosthesis
    Massad, Joseph
    Wicks, Russell
    Ahuja, Swati
    Cagna, David R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2019, 28 (04): : E912 - E916
  • [6] Rationale for a fixed implant-supported transitional prosthesis in full-arch implant restorations
    Leclercq, P.
    Dohan, D. M.
    [J]. REVUE DE STOMATOLOGIE DE CHIRURGIE MAXILLO-FACIALE ET DE CHIRURGIE ORALE, 2007, 108 (06) : 530 - 535
  • [7] Linear Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners for Full-Arch Impressions of Implant-Supported Prostheses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Floriani, Franciele
    Lopes, Guilherme Carpena
    Cabrera, Alexandre
    Duarte, Wagner
    Zoidis, Panagiotis
    Oliveira, Dayane
    Rocha, Mateus Garcia
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2023, 17 (04) : 964 - 973
  • [8] Fixed Implant-Supported Full-Arch Prosthesis in Epidermolysis Bullosa With Severe Symptoms
    Guzman Letelier, Marcelo
    Crisosto Jara, Claudia
    Penarrocha-Oltra, Sonia
    Gomar-Vercher, Sonia
    Penarrocha Diago, Miguel
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL IMPLANTOLOGY, 2016, 42 (06) : 499 - 504
  • [9] Biomechanical Properties and Biocompatibility of Implant-Supported Full Arch Fixed Prosthesis Substructural Materials
    Eraslan, R.
    Colpak, E. D.
    Kilic, K.
    Polat, Z. Akin
    [J]. NIGERIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2021, 24 (09) : 1373 - 1379
  • [10] Retrieval Technique for Full-Arch Implant-Supported Fixed Prosthesis: A Clinical Report
    Simamoto-Junior, Paulo Cesar
    Fernandes-Neto, Alfredo Julio
    Neves, Flavio Domingues
    Dantas, Talita Souza
    Naves, Lucas Zago
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2015, 24 (02): : 168 - 171