Evaluation of the Accuracy of Four Digital Methods by Linear and Volumetric Analysis of Dental Impressions.
intraoral scanners
point cloud registration
volumetric error distribution
Journal
Materials (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 1996-1944
Titre abrégé: Materials (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101555929
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 Jun 2019
18 Jun 2019
Historique:
received:
12
04
2019
revised:
12
06
2019
accepted:
13
06
2019
entrez:
21
6
2019
pubmed:
21
6
2019
medline:
21
6
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The quality of dental arch impression has a substantial role in the precision of the intervention. It is traditionally acquired with resins that solidify when in contact with the air. Compared to that method, digital impression gives great advantages and, together with three-dimensional (3D) digitization devices, allows a simplification of the digital impression process. The growing adoption of such systems by a large number of dental clinics determines the need for an in-depth evaluation of the accuracy and the precision of the different systems. The aim of this work is to define a methodology for the evaluation of the accuracy and precision of 3D intraoral and desktop scanning systems, by using volumetric and linear methods. The replica of a tooth was realized with zirconium; afterward, high-accuracy point clouds of the master model were acquired by a coordinate measurement machine (CMM). In this way, the dimensions of the replica were accurately known. An intraoral scanner (I) and three desktops (D1, D2, D3) were then used to scan the replica. The geometry resulting from the CMM was compared with the ones derived from the scanners, using two different commercial programs (Geomagic and 3-Matic) and a custom-developed algorithm (MATLAB). Geomagic showed the mean values to be in a range from 0.0286 mm (D1) to 0.1654 mm (I), while 3-Matic showed mean values from -0.0396 mm (D1) to 0.1303 mm (I). MATLAB results ranged from 0.00014 mm (D1) to 0.00049 mm (D2). The probability distributions of the volumetric error of the measurements obtained with the different scanners allow a direct comparison of their performances. For the results given by our study, the volumetric approach that we adopted appears to be an excellent system of analysis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31216639
pii: ma12121958
doi: 10.3390/ma12121958
pmc: PMC6631156
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Int J Comput Dent. 1999 Apr;2(2):129-36
pubmed: 11351491
Int J Prosthodont. 2001 Mar-Apr;14(2):146-51
pubmed: 11843451
J Dent Res. 2003 Jun;82(6):438-42
pubmed: 12766195
Br J Orthod. 1992 Aug;19(3):227-32
pubmed: 1390579
Quintessence Int. 2006 Jan;37(1):47-51
pubmed: 16429703
Int J Comput Dent. 2005 Oct;8(4):283-94
pubmed: 16689029
J Clin Dent. 2007;18(2):29-33
pubmed: 17508620
Dent Clin North Am. 2007 Jul;51(3):629-42, vi
pubmed: 17586147
Dent Mater. 2008 Aug;24(8):1123-30
pubmed: 18336900
J Prosthet Dent. 2008 Apr;99(4):274-81
pubmed: 18395537
Br Dent J. 2008 May 10;204(9):505-11
pubmed: 18469768
J Am Dent Assoc. 2008 Jun;139(6):761-3
pubmed: 18520000
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2008 Sep 01;9(6):49-56
pubmed: 18784859
Int J Comput Dent. 2009;12(2):159-63
pubmed: 19413271
Int J Prosthodont. 2009 Mar-Apr;22(2):158-60
pubmed: 19418862
Int J Prosthodont. 2009 May-Jun;22(3):296-302
pubmed: 19548415
J Am Dent Assoc. 2009 Oct;140(10):1301-4
pubmed: 19797561
J Dent. 2010 Jul;38(7):553-9
pubmed: 20381576
J Calif Dent Assoc. 2010 May;38(5):333-6
pubmed: 20572527
Int J Prosthodont. 2011 Jan-Feb;24(1):49-54
pubmed: 21210004
Int J Comput Dent. 2011;14(1):11-21
pubmed: 21657122
Angle Orthod. 2012 Nov;82(6):1098-106
pubmed: 22530811
Clin Oral Investig. 2013 May;17(4):1201-8
pubmed: 22847854
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012 Sep;142(3):308-13
pubmed: 22920696
J Prosthet Dent. 2013 Feb;109(2):121-8
pubmed: 23395338
Int J Prosthodont. 2013 Mar-Apr;26(2):161-3
pubmed: 23476911
Angle Orthod. 2014 Jan;84(1):62-7
pubmed: 23742197
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013 Sep;144(3):471-8
pubmed: 23992820
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2014 Feb;102(2):384-94
pubmed: 24000235
Clin Oral Investig. 2014 Jul;18(6):1687-94
pubmed: 24240949
BMC Oral Health. 2014 Jan 30;14:10
pubmed: 24479892
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2015 May;18(2):65-76
pubmed: 25677755
J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Mar;115(3):313-20
pubmed: 26548890
J Dent. 2016 Dec;55:68-74
pubmed: 27717754
J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Jul;118(1):36-42
pubmed: 28024822
Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2017 May 1;74:334-346
pubmed: 28254302
Materials (Basel). 2017 May 18;10(5):null
pubmed: 28772905
Materials (Basel). 2017 Jul 08;10(7):null
pubmed: 28773129
Materials (Basel). 2017 Dec 21;11(1):null
pubmed: 29267248
BMC Oral Health. 2018 Feb 23;18(1):27
pubmed: 29471825
J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Dec;120(6):895-903.e1
pubmed: 30006228
J Prosthet Dent. 2019 Apr;121(4):690-693
pubmed: 30503148