Accuracy of edentulous full-arch implant impression: An in vitro comparison between conventional impression, intraoral scan with and without splinting, and photogrammetry

被引:5
|
作者
Cheng, Jing [1 ]
Zhang, Haidong [2 ,3 ,4 ,5 ]
Liu, Hailin [6 ]
Li, Junying [7 ]
Wang, Hom-Lay [8 ,10 ]
Tao, Xian [9 ,11 ]
机构
[1] Xiamen Med Coll, Stomatol Hosp, Dept Gen Dent, Xiamen Key Lab Stomatol Dis Diag & Treatment, Xiamen, Peoples R China
[2] Peking Univ, Sch & Hosp Stomatol, Dept Periodontol, Beijing, Peoples R China
[3] Natl Ctr Stomatol, Beijing, Peoples R China
[4] Natl Clin Res Ctr Oral Dis, Beijing, Peoples R China
[5] Natl Engn Lab Digital & Mat Technol Stomatol, Beijing, Peoples R China
[6] Jingpin Med Technol Beijing Co Ltd, Beijing, Peoples R China
[7] Univ Michigan, Dept Biol & Mat Sci & Prosthodont, Sch Dent, Ann Arbor, MI USA
[8] Univ Michigan, Sch Dent, Dept Periodont & Oral Med, Ann Arbor, MI USA
[9] Stomatol Hosp, Dept Prosthodont, Xiamen Key Lab Stomatol Dis Diag & Treatment, Xiamen Med Coll, Xiamen, Peoples R China
[10] Univ Michigan, Dept Periodont & Oral Med, Sch Dent, 1011 North Univ Ave, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[11] Xiamen Med Coll, Stomatol Hosp, Dept Prosthodont, 1309 Lvling Rd, Xiamen 361008, Fujian, Peoples R China
关键词
accuracy; digital impression; intraoral scanning; stereophotogrammetry; MULTIPLE IMPLANTS; PART I; MISFIT; PROSTHESES; POSITIONS; SURVIVAL; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1111/clr.14252
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the trueness and precision of complete arch implant impressions using conventional impression, intraoral scanning with and without splinting, and stereophotogrammetry. Materials and Methods: An edentulous model with six implants was used in this study. Four implant impression techniques were compared: the conventional impression (CI), intraoral scanning (IOS) without splinting, intraoral scanning with splinting (MIOS), and stereophotogrammetry (SPG). An industrial blue light scanner was used to generate the baseline scan from the model. The CI was captured with a laboratory scanner. The reference best-fit method was then applied in the computer-aided design (CAD) software to compute the three-dimensional, angular, and linear discrepancies among the four impression techniques. The root mean square (RMS) 3D discrepancies in trueness and precision between the four impression groups were analyzed with a Kruskal-Wallis test. Trueness and precision between single analogs were assessed using generalized estimating equations. Results: Significant differences in the overall trueness (p = .017) and precision (p < .001) were observed across four impression groups. The SPG group exhibited significantly smaller RMS 3D deviations than the CI, IOS, and MIOS groups (p < .05), with no significant difference detected among the latter three groups (p > .05). Conclusions: Stereophotogrammetry showed superior trueness and precision, meeting misfit thresholds for implant-supported complete arch prostheses. Intraoral scanning, while accurate like conventional impressions, exhibited cross-arch angular and linear deviations. Adding a splint to the scan body did not improve intraoral scanning accuracy.
引用
收藏
页码:560 / 572
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] In Vitro Comparison of the Accuracy of Conventional Impression and Four Intraoral Scanners in Four Different Implant Impression Scenarios
    Alpkilic, Dilara Seyma
    Deger, Sabire Isler
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2022, 37 (01) : 39 - 48
  • [12] Comparison of the accuracy between full-arch digital scans and scannable impression materials: an in vitro study
    Grande, Francesco
    Celeghin, Giordano
    Gallinaro, Federica
    Mobilio, Nicola
    Catapano, Santo
    MINERVA DENTAL AND ORAL SCIENCE, 2023, 72 (04) : 168 - 175
  • [13] Accuracy of Conventional and Digital Methods of Obtaining Full-Arch Dental Impression (In Vitro Study)
    Husein, Hassan A.
    Morad, Mhd. Luai
    Kanout, Shaza
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2022, 14 (09)
  • [14] Precision and Accuracy of a Digital Impression Scanner in Full-Arch Implant Rehabilitation
    Pesce, Paolo
    Pera, Francesco
    Setti, Paolo
    Menini, Maria
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS, 2018, 31 (02) : 171 - 175
  • [15] Accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impression with or without scanbody splinting: An in vitro study
    Pozzi, Alessandro
    Arcuri, Lorenzo
    Lio, Fabrizio
    Papa, Andrea
    Nardi, Alessandra
    Londono, Jimmy
    JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2022, 119
  • [16] Comparison of conventional, photogrammetry, and intraoral scanning accuracy of complete-arch implant impression procedures evaluated with a coordinate measuring machine
    Revilla-Leon, Marta
    Att, Wael
    Ozcan, Mutlu
    Rubenstein, Jeffrey
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2021, 125 (03): : 470 - 478
  • [17] Effect of splinting scan bodies on trueness of complete-arch implant impression using different intraoral scanners: an in vitro study
    Retana, Luciano
    Nejat, Amir H.
    Pozzi, Alessandro
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPUTERIZED DENTISTRY, 2023, 26 (01) : 19 - 28
  • [18] The accuracy of edentulous arch impression between intraoral scanner and laboratory scanner: a scoping review
    Athiyyah Aura Achmadi
    Rasmi Rikmasari
    Fahmi Oscandar
    Vita Mulya Passa Novianti
    BDJ Open, 11 (1)
  • [19] Accuracy of intraoral optical scan versus stereophotogrammetry for complete-arch digital implant impression: An in vitro study
    Pozzi, Alessandro
    Agliardi, Enrico
    Lio, Fabrizio
    Nagy, Katalin
    Nardi, Alessandra
    Arcuri, Lorenzo
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTIC RESEARCH, 2024, 68 (01) : 172 - 180
  • [20] Accuracy of Implant Level Intraoral Scanning and Photogrammetry Impression Techniques in a Complete Arch with Angled and Parallel Implants: An In Vitro Study
    Tohme, Hani
    Lawand, Ghida
    Eid, Rita
    Ahmed, Khaled E.
    Salameh, Ziad
    Makzoume, Joseph
    APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL, 2021, 11 (21):