Trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the trueness of 5 intraoral scanners (IOSs) for digital impression of simulated implant scan bodies in a partially edentulous model. A 3D printed partially edentulous mandible model made of Co-Cr with a total of 6 bilaterally positioned cylinders in the canine,...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2019-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222070 |
id |
doaj-5733e59197de4da394d2df211f4fa536 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-5733e59197de4da394d2df211f4fa5362021-03-03T21:14:32ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-011411e022207010.1371/journal.pone.0222070Trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position.Ryan Jin-Young KimGoran I BenicJi-Man ParkThe aim of this study was to evaluate the trueness of 5 intraoral scanners (IOSs) for digital impression of simulated implant scan bodies in a partially edentulous model. A 3D printed partially edentulous mandible model made of Co-Cr with a total of 6 bilaterally positioned cylinders in the canine, second premolar, and second molar area served as the study model. Digital scans of the model were made with a reference scanner (steroSCAN neo) and 5 IOSs (CEREC Omnicam, CS3600, i500, iTero Element, and TRIOS 3) (n = 10). For each IOS's dataset, the XYZ coordinates of the cylinders were obtained from the reference point and the deviations from the reference scanner were calculated using a 3D reverse engineering program (Rapidform). The trueness values were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney post hoc test. Direction and amount of deviation differed among cylinder position and among IOSs. Regardless of the IOS type, the cylinders positioned on the left second molar, nearest to the scanning start point, showed the smallest deviation. The deviation generally increased further away from scanning start point towards the right second molar. TRIOS 3 and i500 outperformed the other IOSs for partially edentulous digital impression. The accuracy of the CEREC Omnicam, CS3600, and iTero Element were similar on the left side, but they showed more deviations on the right side of the arch when compared to the other IOSs. The accuracy of IOS is still an area that needs to be improved.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222070 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Ryan Jin-Young Kim Goran I Benic Ji-Man Park |
spellingShingle |
Ryan Jin-Young Kim Goran I Benic Ji-Man Park Trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position. PLoS ONE |
author_facet |
Ryan Jin-Young Kim Goran I Benic Ji-Man Park |
author_sort |
Ryan Jin-Young Kim |
title |
Trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position. |
title_short |
Trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position. |
title_full |
Trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position. |
title_fullStr |
Trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position. |
title_sort |
trueness of digital intraoral impression in reproducing multiple implant position. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2019-01-01 |
description |
The aim of this study was to evaluate the trueness of 5 intraoral scanners (IOSs) for digital impression of simulated implant scan bodies in a partially edentulous model. A 3D printed partially edentulous mandible model made of Co-Cr with a total of 6 bilaterally positioned cylinders in the canine, second premolar, and second molar area served as the study model. Digital scans of the model were made with a reference scanner (steroSCAN neo) and 5 IOSs (CEREC Omnicam, CS3600, i500, iTero Element, and TRIOS 3) (n = 10). For each IOS's dataset, the XYZ coordinates of the cylinders were obtained from the reference point and the deviations from the reference scanner were calculated using a 3D reverse engineering program (Rapidform). The trueness values were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney post hoc test. Direction and amount of deviation differed among cylinder position and among IOSs. Regardless of the IOS type, the cylinders positioned on the left second molar, nearest to the scanning start point, showed the smallest deviation. The deviation generally increased further away from scanning start point towards the right second molar. TRIOS 3 and i500 outperformed the other IOSs for partially edentulous digital impression. The accuracy of the CEREC Omnicam, CS3600, and iTero Element were similar on the left side, but they showed more deviations on the right side of the arch when compared to the other IOSs. The accuracy of IOS is still an area that needs to be improved. |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222070 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT ryanjinyoungkim truenessofdigitalintraoralimpressioninreproducingmultipleimplantposition AT goranibenic truenessofdigitalintraoralimpressioninreproducingmultipleimplantposition AT jimanpark truenessofdigitalintraoralimpressioninreproducingmultipleimplantposition |
_version_ |
1714817936584081408 |