Evaluation of hypermobile teeth deviation during impression taking in a partially edentulous dental arch: An in vitro study comparing digital and conventional impression techniques.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the deviation of hypermobile teeth in partially edentulous dental arches during impression taking using digital and conventional techniques. METHODS: A partially edentulous mandibular model with three target hypermobile teeth (including the left first premolar, #34; left second molar, #37; and right first premolar, #44), was used as the simulation model. After reference data were acquired using a desktop scanner, impressions of the simulation model were obtained using a digital intraoral scanner (IOS) and two conventional techniques (hydrocolloid material with a stock tray and silicone material with a custom tray as impression data (n=12/group). The three-dimensional accuracy (root mean square value) and two-dimensional accuracy (mesiodistal and buccolingual displacements) of the target teeth in each impression dataset were calculated based on the reference data. The comparison among three impression techniques was statistically performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test (α=0.05). RESULTS: For #34 and #44, the three- and two-dimensional accuracies of the impressions fabricated through data acquired through digital scanning (digital impression) were significantly superior to those of the hydrocolloid impression (P < 0.05), whereas no significant difference was found between the digital and silicone impressions. For #37, no significant difference in the accuracy of the impression data for the target teeth was observed among the three impression techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Digital impression acquiring using an IOS is recommended over using a conventional hydrocolloid impression to prevent the deviation of hypermobile teeth in partially edentulous dental arches. Hypermobile tooth deviation in digital impression data depends on the tooth location.

Morphological Comparison of Residual Ridge in Impression for Removable Partial Denture between Digital and Conventional Techniques: A Preliminary In-Vivo Study.

Although digital impression using an intraoral scanner (IOS) has been applied for removable partial denture (RPD) fabrication, it is still unclear how the morphology of a residual ridge recorded by digital impression would differ from that recorded by conventional impression. This in vivo study investigated the morphological difference in the recorded residual ridge between digital and conventional impressions. Vertical and horizontal displacements (VD and HD) in residual ridges recorded by digital and conventional impressions were assessed in 22 participants (15 female; mean age 78.2 years) based on the morphology of the tissue surface of in-use RPD. Additionally, the mucosal thickness of the residual ridge was recorded using an ultrasound diagnostic device. VD and HD were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and the correlation of mucosal thickness with VD and HD was analyzed using Spearman's ρ. The VD of digital impression was significantly greater than that of a conventional impression (p = 0.031), while no significant difference was found in HD (p = 0.322). Meanwhile, the mucosal thickness showed no significant correlation with the recorded morphology of the residual ridge, regardless of the impression techniques. It was concluded that the digital impression would result in a greater displacement in the height of the residual ridge from the morphology of in-use RPD than the conventional impression.

Effect of abutment tooth location on the accuracy of digital impressions obtained using an intraoral scanner for removable partial dentures.

PURPOSE: To verify the effect of abutment tooth location on the accuracy of digital impressions obtained using an intraoral scanner (IOS) for removable partial dentures (RPDs). METHODS: The target abutment teeth included the left first premolar (#34), second molar (#37), and right second premolar (#45) in a mandibular Kennedy class II model and the left and right second molars (#37, #47) in a class III model. Only #37 was isolated from the remaining teeth by the mucosal area in both models. Digital impressions were obtained using a desktop scanner (reference data) and an IOS (IOS data; scanning origin #37; n=10). The general trueness based on the entire model superimposition (TG), local trueness (TL) of an individual tooth, and dimensional accuracy (coordinate and linear accuracy) of the IOS data of the target abutment teeth were compared (α=0.05). RESULTS: In both models, #37 showed significantly inferior TG (P<0.01), superior TL (P<0.01), and mesial coordinate displacement (P<0.01 and P<0.05 in class II and III models, respectively). Intra-model comparisons showed that #45 in the class II model and #47 in the class III model had significantly inferior linear accuracy (P<0.05 and P<0.01, respectively) and buccal coordinate displacement (P<0.05 and P<0.01, respectively) compared with the other target teeth. CONCLUSIONS: In digital impressions of RPDs, isolation of abutment teeth by mucosal areas can reduce general trueness based on the entire dental arch and mesial tooth displacement, whereas increased distance from the scanning origin can adversely affect local trueness and dimensional accuracy.

Effect of Scanning Origin Location on Data Accuracy of Abutment Teeth Region in Digital Impression Acquired Using Intraoral Scanner for Removable Partial Denture: A Preliminary In Vitro Study.

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of scanning origin location on the data accuracy of removable partial denture (RPD) abutment teeth region in digital impressions acquired by an intraoral scanner. A mandibular partially edentulous model including the following target abutment teeth was used: the left second molar (#37); left first premolar (#34); and right second premolar (#45). The following scanning strategies were tested: the strategy starting from #37 to mesial direction (37M); strategies starting from #34 to mesial (34M) and distal directions (34D), and strategies starting from #45 to mesial (45M) and distal directions (45D). The evaluated measures were trueness, precision, and linear accuracy. One-way and two-way ANOVA were performed for the comparison of trueness and linear accuracy, while Kruskal-Wallis test was performed for the precision comparison (α = 0.05). 45M and 45D showed significantly superior trueness of #34 to 37M and 34D. 45M also showed significantly superior trueness of #45 to 34. 45D showed significantly inferior linear accuracy of #34 and superior linear accuracy of #45 compared to other strategies. It was concluded that scanning origin location would have an impact on data accuracy of RPD abutment teeth region in digital impressions acquired by intraoral scanner.