Accuracy of 3D digital modeling of dental arches.
Journal
Dental press journal of orthodontics
ISSN: 2177-6709
Titre abrégé: Dental Press J Orthod
Pays: Brazil
ID NLM: 101532240
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
05
05
2018
accepted:
03
11
2018
entrez:
28
3
2019
pubmed:
28
3
2019
medline:
6
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of the study was to verify and compare the accuracy of full-arch digital impressions obtained using two intraoral scanners and three scanning methodologies. A resin model created with dental 3-D printing was scanned by a reference scanner (Zfx Evolution - Zimmer Biomet, Palm Beach Gardens, FL) in order to obtain a 3D reference; the same resin model was then scanned with two different intraoral scanners (Zfx IntraScan and Carestream 3600 - CS 3600®, Carestream, Rochester, NY, USA) using: Technique A (from tooth #27 up to tooth #17); Technique B (from tooth #11 up to tooth #17 and then from tooth #21 up to tooth #27) and Technique C (from tooth #22 up to tooth #17, and then from tooth #12 up to tooth #27 - the MeshLab software v. 1.3.3 was then used to match the two scans). The scans obtained were superimposed over the reference scan by means of a software, and the volumetric discrepancies were calculated. The mean results for the Zfx Intrascan scanner were: Technique A = 302.47 ± 37.42 µm; Technique B = 180.45 ± 29.86 µm; Technique C = 147.34 ± 28.23 µm. The mean results for the Carestream 3600 scanner were: Technique A = 303.59 ± 40.20 µm; Technique B = 181.53 ± 29.61 µm; Technique C = 142.28 ± 35.33 µm. Technique C, used by both scanners, produced less volumetric discrepancies compared to the other techniques. The scanning technique had a statistically significant effect on the quality of the scan (p< 0.0001), whereas the scanner did not present any significant influence (p= 0.91).
Identifiants
pubmed: 30916255
pii: S2176-94512019000100002
doi: 10.1590/2177-6709.24.1.38.e1-7.onl
pmc: PMC6434670
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
38e1-37e7Références
Int J Comput Dent. 2005 Oct;8(4):283-94
pubmed: 16689029
Int J Comput Dent. 2009;12(1):11-28
pubmed: 19213357
J Am Dent Assoc. 2009 Oct;140(10):1301-4
pubmed: 19797561
Angle Orthod. 2010 May;80(3):435-9
pubmed: 20050733
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2011 Feb;14(1):1-16
pubmed: 21205164
Int J Comput Dent. 2011;14(1):11-21
pubmed: 21657122
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013 Jan;24(1):111-5
pubmed: 22353208
Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2012 Jun;13(2):151-4
pubmed: 22762180
Clin Oral Investig. 2013 May;17(4):1201-8
pubmed: 22847854
PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e43312
pubmed: 22937030
Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2012 Sep;13(3):244-8
pubmed: 22971266
Clin Oral Investig. 2013 Sep;17(7):1759-64
pubmed: 23086333
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013 Jan;143(1):140-7
pubmed: 23273370
J Prosthet Dent. 2013 Feb;109(2):121-8
pubmed: 23395338
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013 Aug;144(2):304-10
pubmed: 23910212
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013 Sep;144(3):471-8
pubmed: 23992820
Clin Oral Investig. 2014 Jul;18(6):1687-94
pubmed: 24240949
Quintessence Int. 2015 Jan;46(1):9-17
pubmed: 25019118
Angle Orthod. 2015 May;85(3):501-9
pubmed: 25098186
Stomatologiia (Mosk). 2016;95(4):65-70
pubmed: 27636766
BMC Oral Health. 2017 Sep 19;17(1):124
pubmed: 28927393