Evaluating the precision and accuracy of digital dental models with a low-cost structured light device.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the accuracy and precision of digital models acquisition using a home-built, low-cost scanning system based on the structured light method. METHODS: a plaster model (PM) was scanned using the experimental device (SL) and a dental desktop scanner (DS). The teeth dimensions of PM and SL models were measured in triplicate, with a caliper and digitally, respectively. The agreement of the measurements of each model was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient, and the validity between the different measurement techniques was assessed using the Bland-Altman analysis. The accuracy and precision of the models were qualitatively investigated using the mesh superposition of the SL and DS models. RESULTS: A high intraclass correlation coefficient was observed in all models (PM=0.964; SL1=0.998; SL2=0.995; SL3=0.998), and there was no statistical difference between the measurements of the SL models (p>0.05). PM and SL model measurements were found to be in good agreement, with only 3.57% of the observed differences between the same measurement being located outside 95% limits of agreement according to Bland and Altman (0.43 and -0.40 mm). In the superimpositions of SL-SL and SL-DS models, areas of discrepancy greater than 0.5 mm were observed mainly in interproximal, occlusal, and cervical sites. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that the home-built SL scanning system did not possess sufficient accuracy and precision for many clinical applications. However, the consistency in preserving the dental proportions suggests that the equipment can be used for planning, storage, and simple clinical purposes.

Precisão dos escaneamentos intraorais e modelos 3D, com diferentes escâneres e softwares: revisão sistemática / Accuracy of intraoral scanning and 3D models, with different scanners and software: systematic review

Objetivo: Esta revisão sistemática investigou se a precisão dos escaneamentos intraorais e modelos 3D com diferentes escâneres e softwares, é suficiente para os clínicos aceitarem e implementarem as novas tecnologias como critério de diagnóstico e planejamentos dos tratamentos. Material e métodos: Protocolo PROSPERO número CRD42020218151. Duas revisoras realizaram uma pesquisa avançada de banco de dados eletrônico, sem restrição de idioma ou data, no MEDLINE/PubMed; Embase; BVS/LILACS; Scopus; Cochrane Library; Google Scholar e Web of Science até janeiro de 2021. Os estudos foram escolhidos por título e resumo para triagem, de acordo com os seguintes critérios de inclusão: Estudos Clínicos in vivo e in vitro (pacientes, modelos de gesso de pacientes e manequins simulando bocas humanas) com os diferentes softwares e técnicas de escaneamento intraoral comparando a acurácia, fidelidade e/ou precisão como desfecho dos escaneamentos intraorais, dos modelos virtuais em 3D com modelos de gesso; com um mínimo de 5 pacientes escaneados sem limite de idade ou gênero; texto completo acessível; nos estudos de coorte, transversais e caso-controle. Após a leitura do texto completo os artigos foram excluídos de acordo com os seguintes critérios: 1) estudos com menos de 5 pacientes; 2) estudos em animais; 3) revisão sistemática, descrição de técnica, intervenções, protocolos; 4) escaneamentos por Ressonância Magnética ou Tomografia computadorizada; 5) estudos em que não foram utilizados scanners intraorais. Resultados. Dos 4410 estudos inicialmente identificados, 16 preencheram os critérios de inclusão. O guia PRISMA foi utilizado para redação da revisão e a ferramenta ROBINS-1 da Cochrane foi utilizada para análise de viés. Os estudos incluídos na sua maioria mostraram diferenças estatisticamente significativas entre os resultados das moldagens convencionais e digitais, porém também demonstraram que as diferenças não têm significância clínica. Conclusões: Esta revisão sistemática permitiu levantar dados que demonstraram que os escaneamentos intraorais não são superiores às moldagens convencionais, mas de acurácia equivalente com confiabilidade para o uso das imagens digitais conseguidas por escaneamento intraoral e dos modelos digitais provenientes destes escaneamentos.

Influence of intraoral scanning coverage on the accuracy of digital implant impressions - An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the influence of intraoral scanning coverage (IOSC) on digital implant impression accuracy in various partially edentulous situations and predict the optimal IOSC. METHODS: Five types of resin models were fabricated, each simulating single or multiple tooth loss scenarios with inserted implants and scan bodies. IOSC was subgrouped to cover two, four, six, eight, ten, and twelve teeth, as well as full arch. Each group underwent ten scans. A desktop scanner served as the reference. Accuracy was evaluated by measuring the Root mean square error (RMSE) values of scan bodies. A convolutional neural network (CNN) was trained to predict the optimal IOSC with different edentulous situations. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test. RESULTS: For single-tooth-missing situations, in anterior sites, significantly better accuracy was observed in groups with IOSC ranging from four teeth to full arch (p < 0.05). In premolar sites, IOSC spanning four to six teeth were more accurate (p < 0.05), while in molar sites, groups with IOSC encompassing two to eight teeth exhibited better accuracy (p < 0.05). For multiple-teeth-missing situations, IOSC covering four, six, and eight teeth, as well as full arch showed better accuracy in anterior gaps (p < 0.05). In posterior gaps, IOSC of two, four, six or eight teeth were more accurate (p < 0.05). The CNN predicted distinct optimal IOSC for different edentulous scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Implant impression accuracy can be significantly impacted by IOSC in different partially edentulous situations. The selection of IOSC should be customized to the specific dentition defect condition. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The number of teeth scanned can significantly affect digital implant impression accuracy. For missing single or four anterior teeth, scan at least four or six neighboring teeth is acceptable. In lateral cases, two neighboring teeth may suffice, but extending over ten teeth, including contralateral side, might deteriorate the scan.

Comparative Accuracy of Intraoral and Extraoral Digital Workflows for Short Span Implant Supported Fixed Partial Denture Fabrication: An In Vitro Study.

BACKGROUND The advent of digital impressions using computer-aided design and manufacturing technology (CAD/CAM) has simplified and improved the fabrication of implant prostheses in dentistry. The conventional impression has several drawbacks, including tray selection, material type, impression technique, impression disinfection, and cast model storage. The inaccuracies caused by distortion and contraction of impression material can be minimized with digital impressions. This study aimed to compare digital dental impressions of 10 working casts made using the Pindex laser removable die system to fabricate parallel drill channels vs 10 working casts made using the Di-Lok plastic tray removable die system. MATERIAL AND METHODS An implant master die with 2 dental implant analogs was fabricated. Ten working casts using the Pindex laser removable die system with parallel drill channels and 10 working casts using the Di-Lok plastic tray removable die system were fabricated. The working casts were scanned using an extra-oral laboratory scanner and the implant master model was scanned with an intra-oral scanner. RESULTS The properties of the casts made using the 2 systems were evaluated and analyzed with ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test. The mean horizontal linear distances between A1B1 (P<0.021), A2B2 (P<0.018), C1D1 (P<0.026), C2D2 (P<0.03), B1C1 (P<0.01), and mean vertical distances between B1A2 (P<0.015), C1D2 (P<0.001), B1B2 (P<0.028), and C1C2 (P<0.001) were significantly different between the Pindex system and Di-Lok tray system as compared to intra-oral scans. CONCLUSIONS Complete digital workflow with intra-oral scans were more than the partial digital workflow with extra-oral scans for the Pindex system and Di-Lok tray systems.

New complementary alternatives in third molar autotransplantation: A systematic review

Background: Dental autotransplantation (DAT) is defined as the replacement or direct transfer of an impacted, semi-impacted or erupted tooth to a donor site, either to a post-extraction socket or to a surgically created socket within the same individual. The use of new technological advances, such as 3-D dental models based on computer-aided design, among others, have been reported to improve the success rate of DAT. Therefore, we aimed to perform a systematic review to explore the possible benefits that the use of these innovative techniques can provide when applied to DAT. Material and Methods: The literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases following the PRISMA guidelines. The research question was: "Are computerized technological advancements a useful tool for improving the success of third molar autotransplantation technique? Results: The initial literature search identified 195 articles, of which only 11 were included for qualitative analysis. All studies used 3D dental models based on computer-aided design data. Surgical guides and stereolithographic models were used by 4 and 1 study respectively. A total of 91 transplanted teeth were evaluated, out of which only 88 were considered within the parameters of clinical success (96.7%). Only 7 out of the 11 articles reported the specific autotransplanted tooth, being mandibular third molars the most prevalent autotransplanted teeth. Conclusions: Although the application of new technologies for DAT increases the success rate of this technique, further primary studies are still needed to address long-term teeth survival rates and complications. The cost and availability to implement the integration of these techniques to DAT may be a variable to consider, as this can be a limitation for some patients or for low-income countries. (AU)

Accuracy of maxillary full-arch digital impressions of tooth and implant models made by two intraoral scanners.

OBJECTIVES: Limited studies are available on the accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs) for full-arch implant and tooth models. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of maxillary full-arch digital impressions of tooth and implant models made by two IOSs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This in vitro, experimental study was conducted on two maxillary dentiform models: one with six prepared natural teeth and the other with six implants at the site of canine, first premolar, and first molar teeth, bilaterally. A highly accurate industrial scanner was used for actual measurements on the models that served as the reference scan. TS (Trios3) and CO (CEREC Omnicam) IOSs were then used to scan each model 10 times according to the manufacturer's instructions. All scans were saved in STL format. The GOM Inspect software was used according to the best-fit algorithm to compare the accuracy of measurements in the groups with the reference scan. The trueness and precision were calculated. Statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS by one-way analysis of variance and t-test (α = .05). RESULTS: TS showed a significantly higher trueness than CO for both tooth and implant models (p < .05). TS also revealed significantly higher precision than CO for the tooth model; however, the difference in precision for the implant model was not significant between the two IOSs (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: TS showed higher accuracy than CO in both tooth and implant models.

Influence of a specially designed geometric device and modified scan bodies on the accuracy of a maxillary complete arch digital implant scan: An in vitro study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Capturing accurate complete arch digital implant scans remains a challenging process because of the lack of recognizable anatomic landmarks. The effect of modified scan bodies (SBs) on improving scanning accuracy is unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate and compare the accuracy of a maxillary complete arch digital implant scan when using a specially designed geometric device with the accuracy of modified scan bodies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four implants were placed in an edentulous maxillary model made of porous bone material with polyurethane attached gingiva. Scan bodies were attached to the implants and then digitized with a high precision laboratory scanner to create the reference scan. Round depressions were made on the buccal and palatal surfaces of the scan bodies, and the model was scanned with an intraoral scanner using 4 different scenarios: the model with no geometric device or modified scan bodies (ND-NM), device only without modified scan bodies (D-NM), no device but with modified scan bodies (ND-M), and device with modified scan bodies (D-M). Each group was scanned 10 times for a total of 40 scans. Trueness and precision were evaluated using inspection software to measure the 3D surface deviation. Trueness was measured by superimposing each test scan on the reference scan, and precision was calculated by superimposing the test scans of the same group with each other. Data were analyzed using the GraphPad Prism version 8.0.0 software program. Two-way ANOVA was performed to assess the effect of the device and modifications on trueness and precision (α=.05). RESULTS: Both the geometric device and SB modifications had a significantly significant effect on trueness and precision (P<.001). Regarding trueness, group D-M had the lowest mean and standard deviation (0.158 ±0.028 mm) in contrast with group ND-NM, which had the highest deviation (0.282 ±0.038 mm). In terms of precision, group D-M showed the lowest mean and standard deviation (0.134 ±0.013 mm), while group ND-NM revealed the highest deviation (0.222 ±0.031 mm). However, no statistically significant interaction was found between the device and modifications regarding either trueness or precision (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: Using a specially designed geometric device improved both the trueness and precision of complete arch digital implant scans. The modified SBs had a positive influence on the scanning trueness and precision, and the best accuracy was achieved when using the geometric device and the modified SBs simultaneously.

Accuracy of conventional impressions and digital scans for implant-supported fixed prostheses in maxillary free-ended partial edentulism: An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of conventional polyether impressions and digital scans produced by five intra-oral scanners (IOSs) in maxillary free-ended partial edentulism for long-span implant-supported prostheses. METHODS: This in vitro study involved the impression of a maxillary model with free-end partial edentulism, in which six implants were placed before digitization using a desktop scanner to generate a digital reference model. Conventional impressions (Impregum Penta Soft, 3M) and digital scans with five IOSs (Trios 3 and 4, 3Shape; Primescan, Dentsply-Sirona; CS 3600, Carestream Dental; and i-500, Medit) were obtained. Conventional impressions were digitized using the same desktop scanner. Each digital STL file of conventional or digital impressions was superimposed over the reference STL file to enable comparison. Trueness was assessed by calculating angles and distance deviations. For precision, dispersions of values around their means were also measured. RESULTS: The mean distance deviation was significantly higher for conventional impressions (454.24 ± 334.70 µm) than for IOSs (ranging from 160.98 ± 204.48 µm to 255.56 ± 395.89 µm) (p < 0.001). The mean angular deviation was high with conventional impressions (1.82 ± 1.51°), intermediate with CS 3600 (1.38 ± 1.42°), Primescan (1.37 ± 2.54°) and Trios 4 (1.30 ± 0.64°) scanners, and lower with I500 (0.97 ± 0.75°) and Trios 3 (1.01 ± 0.85°) scanners (p < 0.001). The dispersion of distance values around their means was lowest with Trios 3 and i-500, followed by CS3600, Primescan, and Trios 4, respectively, and higher for conventional impressions (p < 0.001). The dispersion of angular values was smallest with i-500, Trios 3, and Trios 4 compared with other groups and was highest with Primescan (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of the current study, Trios 3 scanner exhibited the highest accuracy, followed by i-500, Trios 4, CS 3600, Primescan, and conventional impressions respectively. IOSs might be reliable for the fabrication of an implant-supported prosthesis. In vivo studies are required to confirm these findings. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Passive adaptation of the implant-supported framework is a challenge when rehabilitating patients with maxillary free-end partial edentulism. While Conventional impressions remain a reliable and validated technique, but IOSs demonstrated higher accuracy, suitable for the fabrication of long-span implant-supported prostheses in partially edentulous arch.

A Comparative Evaluation of Three Methods of Disinfection of Gypsum Casts and the Changes in Surface Roughness and Dimensional Accuracy after Disinfection-An Ex Vivo Study.

BACKGROUND: One of the major problems of everyday dental practice is cross-contamination. It can place office personnel, dentists, and patients at risk of acquiring serious illness. Disinfection helps in controlling this cross-contamination to an extent. The evaluation was done to find the efficient disinfection method on gypsum casts. AIMS: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the efficacy of three methods of disinfection of gypsum casts, namely, chemical disinfection by immersion, spray method, and microwave method, and also to evaluate and compare changes in surface roughness and dimensional accuracy between the three methods after disinfection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ex vivo and experimental study. Thirty participants were selected, and impressions of the maxillary arch were made using polyvinyl siloxane impression material. Ninety type IV die stone gypsum casts were poured. It was divided into three groups and was subjected to chemical disinfection by immersion and spray methods, and microwave method. The disinfected casts were evaluated for microbial growth, surface roughness, and dimensional accuracy. It was performed by using the one-way analysis of variance test and paired t-test followed by the Kruskal - Wallis test and Wilcoxon signed rank test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Microwave disinfection was more effective than both immersion and spray chemical disinfection methods (P < 0.010 and <0.001). The surface roughness of the microwave-irradiated casts had significantly increased after disinfection. However, there were no significant dimensional changes by any of the methods of disinfection. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the study, the microwave method of disinfection is more effective in eradicating microorganisms when compared to chemical methods of disinfection by immersion and spray methods.

Precise control of digital dental unit to reduce aerosol and splatter production: new challenges for future epidemics.

BACKGROUND: During dental procedures, critical parameters, such as cooling condition, speed of the rotary dental turbine (handpiece), and distance and angle from pollution sources, were evaluated for transmission risk of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), simulated by spiking in a plasmid encoding a modified viral spike protein, HexaPro (S6P), in droplets and aerosols. METHODS: To simulate routine operation in dental clinics, dental procedures were conducted on a dental manikin within a digital dental unit, incorporating different dental handpiece speeds and cooling conditions. The tooth model was immersed in Coomassie brilliant blue dye and was pre-coated with 100 µL water spiked-in with S6P-encoding plasmid. Furthermore, the manikin was surrounded by filter papers and Petri dishes positioned at different distances and angles. Subsequently, the filter papers and Petri dishes were collected to evaluate the aerosol splash points and the viral load of S6P-encoding plasmid in aerosols and splatters generated during the dental procedure. RESULTS: Aerosol splashing generated a localized pollution area extended up to 60 cm, with heightened contamination risks concentrated within a 30 cm radius. Significant differences in aerosol splash points and viral load by different turbine handpiece speeds under any cooling condition (P < 0.05) were detected. The highest level of aerosol splash points and viral load were observed when the handpiece speed was set at 40,000 rpm. Conversely, the lowest level of aerosol splash point and viral load were found at a handpiece speed of 10,000 rpm. Moreover, the aerosol splash points with higher viral load were more prominent in the positions of the operator and assistant compared to other positions. Additionally, the position of the operator exhibited the highest viral load among all positions. CONCLUSIONS: To minimize the spread of aerosol and virus in clinics, dentists are supposed to adopt the minimal viable speed of a dental handpiece with limited cooling water during dental procedures. In addition, comprehensive personal protective equipment is necessary for both dental providers and dental assistants.

Clinical comparative study on the accuracy of palatal rugae in models obtained by different impression materials and intraoral scanning.

OBJECTIVE: Palatal rugae are frequently used in the evaluation of tooth movement after treatment in orthodontics and as a stable region in superimposition. It is important to note that the impression method and material used to record the rugae region affect the accuracy of the impression. The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy of palatal rugae, in three-dimensional (3D) by employing both conventional and digital impression methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, 22 patients (12 females, 10 males) mean age of 13.5 ± 1.7 years old were selected with complete permanent dentition. Three different impressions were taken from the maxillae of the patients: conventional impression using silicone rubber impression material, conventional impression using alginate impression material, and optical impression using an intraoral scanner. The impressions' digital data were analyzed by the GOM Inspect (Version 2018, Braunschweig, Germany), a 3D analysis software. The Root Mean Square (RMS) values of the total ruga region were evaluated in this software. The data were statistically analyzed using the Jamovi program. The Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test were performed due to the non-normal distribution of the data. RESULTS: There is no statistically significant difference between the comparison points of the right and left rugae's medial and lateral points and total rugae regions' RMS values. Although there was no statistically significant difference, the total RMS values of alginate and digital scan measurements showed closer results than the RMS values of silicone and digital scan measurements. CONCLUSION: The study found that there was no statistically significant difference in the total RMS values of the ruga region between traditional and digital impression methods. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The treatment period in orthodontics is long. Different impression materials and methods can be used for diagnostic, mid-treatment, and final impressions. For superimpositions and treatment and post-treatment palatal ruga evaluations, traditional and digital impression methods are clinically acceptable and can be used as alternatives to each other.

Impact of scanning range and image count on the precision of digitally recorded intermaxillary relationships in interocclusal record using intraoral scanner.

PURPOSE: The effect of scan range and the number of scanned images on the precision of in vivo intermaxillary relationship reproduction was evaluated using digital scans acquired with an intraoral scanner. METHODS: The study involved 15 participants with normal occlusion. Two different interocclusal recording settings were employed using the intraoral scanner (TRIOS 4): 'MIN,' focusing on the minimal scan range of the first molar region, and 'MAX,' including the scan range from the right first premolar to the right second molar. These settings were combined with three different image counts, resulting in six experimental conditions. Interocclusal recordings were performed four times for each condition. Dimensional discrepancies between datasets were analyzed using three-dimensional morphometric software and compared using two-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: Median dimensional discrepancies (interquartile range; IQR) of 39.2 (30.7-49.4), 42.2 (32.6-49.3), 30.3 (26.8-44.1), 20.1 (16.0-34.8), 21.8 (19.0-25.1), and 26.6 (19.9-34.5) µm were found for MIN/200, MIN/400, MIN/600, MAX/200, MAX/400, and MAX/600, respectively. Significant differences in dimensional discrepancies according to scan range were found. Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed significant differences between MAX and MIN (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Scan range may affect the precision of intermaxillary relationship reproduction. Thus, scanning of the most extensive region practically achievable is recommended.

Evaluation and comparison of the accuracy of three intraoral scanners for replicating a complete denture.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Technological advances in digital acquisition tools have increased the scope of intraoral scanners (IOSs), including scanning a removable complete denture (RCD) to replicate it. However, studies assessing the accuracy of IOSs for replicating a maxillary or mandibular RCD are lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy (trueness and precision) of 3 IOSs while replicating a maxillary and mandibular RCD. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One maxillary and 1 mandibular RCD were scanned with a desktop scanner (D2000) to obtain the reference model. Two operators scanned each RCD 5 times with 3 different IOSs (TRIOS 4, Primescan, and IS3800), following a predefined acquisition protocol. The 60 study models obtained were compared with the reference model using the Geomagic software program. For each comparison, the mean and standard deviation of discrepancy were calculated. Distances were measured on both the reference and the study model, and differences were calculated to assess whether sagittal or transverse deformations were present. The tolerance percentage of the volume of the digital model compared with the volume of the reference model was determined (difference tolerance was set at 0.1 mm). A univariate analysis of variance followed by a post hoc analysis using the Student-Newman-Keuls (α=.05) test was performed to determine the truest and the most precise IOS. RESULTS: The TRIOS 4 and Primescan IOSs had comparable trueness, with mean dimensional variations of 47 ±27 µm and 57 ±8 µm respectively compared with the reference model. The IS3800 had a lower trueness (98 ±35 µm). Primescan was significantly more precise with a mean standard deviation of 64 ±15 µm (P<.05). The TRIOS 4 (141 ±48 µm) and IS3800 (129 ±24 µm) had comparable precision. Primescan showed the least sagittal and transverse deformation. CONCLUSIONS: This study determined that an RCD can be replicated using an IOS, although all IOSs did not have equal accuracy. An in vivo study needs to assess whether this procedure is clinically acceptable.

Impact of scanning distance on the accuracy of a photogrammetry system.

PURPOSE: To measure the impact of the scanning distance on the accuracy of complete-arch implant scans acquired by using a photogrammetry (PG) system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An edentulous cast with 6 implant abutment analogs was obtained. A brand new implant scan body was positioned on each implant abutment and digitized using an extraoral scanner (T710; Medit) and the reference file was obtained. Three groups were created based on the scanning distance used to acquire complete-arch implant scans by using a PG (PIC System; PIC Dental): 20 (20 group), 30 (30 group), and 35 cm (35 group). An optical marker (PIC Transfer, HC MUA Metal; PIC Dental) was placed on each implant abutment and a total of thirty scans per group were acquired. Euclidean linear and angular measurements were obtained on the reference file was obtained and used to compare the discrepancies with the same measurements obtained on each experimental scan. One-way ANOVA and Tukey tests were used to analyze trueness. The Levene test was used to analyze the precision values (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Significant linear (P < .001) and angular trueness (P < .001) discrepancies were found among the groups. For linear trueness, Tukey test showed that the 20 and 30 groups (P < .001) and 30 and 35 groups were different (P < .001). For angular trueness, the Tukey test revealed that 20 and 30 groups (P = .003), 20 and 35 (P < .001), and 30 and 35 groups were different (P < .001) The Levene test showed no significant linear precision (P = .197) and angular discrepancies (P = .229) among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The scanning distance influenced the trueness of complete-arch implant scans obtained with the PG method tested. The maximum linear trueness mean discrepancy among the groups tested was 10 µm and the maximum angular trueness mean discrepancy among the groups tested was 0.02 .

Comparing CBCT to model scanner for dental model scanning. An in vitro imaging accuracy study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for dental model scanning to the accuracy of model scanners. METHODS: Subjects from private practice were collected and scanned according to specific selection criteria. A total of 10 STL files were produced and used as reference files. They were printed with a three-dimensional (3D) printer and then scanned with CBCT and model scanner. For trueness evaluation, all models were scanned once with both equipments. Each file derived from each scan was compared with the corresponding reference model file. For the precision measurements, the physical model from the first master reference model file was scanned 10 times with each equipment and compared with the reference STL file. A reverse engineering software was used for all 3D best-fit comparisons. RESULTS: With regard to the measurement of trueness of each method, the calculated mean root mean square (RMS) value was 0.06±0.01mm for the CBCT, and 0.15±0.02mm for the model scanner. There was a significant difference between the two methods (P<0.01). For the evaluation of precision of each scanner, the mean RMS value was 0.0056±0.001mm for the CBCT, and 0.153±0.002mm for model scanner. There was a significant difference between the two methods (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Cone Beam Computed Tomography seems to be an accurate method for scanning dental models. CBCT performs better than model scanners to scan dental models in terms of trueness and precision.

Reliability of mixed dentition space analysis using a digital model obtained from an optical impression: a preliminary study.

OBJECTIVE: While mixed dentition space analysis is a common practice in pediatric dentistry, digital models created using an intraoral scanner are not as widely used in clinical settings. This preliminary study used a very small sample size with one reference model and aimed to (1) compare the accuracy of mixed dentition space analysis using a digital model obtained from an optical impression with that of conventional plaster model-based analysis and (2) assess inter-examiner differences. RESULTS: The space required for the mandibular permanent canine and premolars and arch length discrepancy were calculated using each model. The largest significant difference between plaster- and digital model-based analyses was identified when the right arch length discrepancy was considered (-0.49 mm; 95% confidence interval: -0.95-0.03); however, the value was considered clinically insignificant. Significant inter-examiner differences were observed for six items of the plaster model; however, no such differences were observed when using the digital model. In conclusion, digital model space analysis may have the same level of accuracy as conventional plaster model analysis and likely results in smaller inter-examiner differences than plaster model analysis.

Exploring the impact of the extent of the partially edentulous area on the accuracy of two intraoral scanners.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The accuracy of intraoral scans, particularly in edentulous areas, remains a concern despite the increasing use of digital technology, especially intraoral scanners. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess the impact of the extent of an edentulous area on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of intraoral scans from 2 intraoral scanners. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A KaVo dentoform with epoxy resin teeth was used to generate 9 groups with different numbers of teeth removed. A laboratory scanner served as the reference dataset, and 2 intraoral scanners (TRIOS 3 and Primescan AC) were evaluated. A single operator performed all scans following standardized protocols and calibration. Trueness and precision were assessed by using root mean square (RMS) values. Analysis of variance was used to compare trueness and precision values obtained from the 2 scanners and different partially edentulous conditions (α=.05). RESULTS: A significant difference was found in the trueness of intraoral scans of the 2 scanners and under different partially edentulous extensions. Primescan AC exhibited significantly lower trueness than TRIOS 3 (P<.001). For the individual edentulous conditions, Primescan had a significantly higher RMS mean than TRIOS 3 for G0, G3, G4, G6, G7, and G8 (P<.001) and a significantly lower RMS mean than TRIOS 3 for G1 and G4 (P<.001), while no significant difference in RMS mean was found between the 2 scanners for G2 (P=.999). For precision, no significant difference was found between the 2 scanners or different edentulous conditions [(F 8, 90)=1.82, P=.085]. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of intraoral scans was influenced by the length of edentulous areas and the scanner used. Primescan AC demonstrated lower trueness than TRIOS 3 for most partially edentulous conditions, while the scanners were similar in precision. These findings highlight the need for careful scanner selection in specific clinical situations, as scanning accuracy may vary depending on the scanner and edentulous condition.

Lingual bracket transfer accuracy of double vacuum-formed indirect bonding tray using 3D-printed model: an in vivo study.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess the transfer accuracy of a digital indirect bonding method for lingual brackets using double vacuum-formed trays in vivo. METHODS: Twenty-five patients in need of lingual orthodontic treatment were consecutively recruited. Bracket placement was performed on ideal setups, followed by fabricating indirect bonding trays through vacuum-forming on 3-dimensional printed models. Transfer accuracy was measured at each bracket after superimpositions of postbonding scans and reference data. One-tailed t tests were used to determine whether bracket deviations were within the limit of 0.5 mm and 2° for linear and angular dimensions, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 611 lingual brackets were evaluated. Mean linear transfer errors were 0.06 mm, 0.09 mm, and 0.12 mm, with frequencies of deviations within the 0.5 mm limit of 99.7%, 99.8%, and 98.0% for mesiodistal, buccolingual, and occlusogingival dimensions, respectively. Regarding angular measurements, mean transfer errors were 1.28°, 1.73°, and 2.96°, with frequencies of deviations within the 2° limit of 81.0%, 68.9%, and 51.1% for rotation, tip, and torque, respectively. Mean errors fell within the clinically accepted limits for all linear dimensions and rotation but exceeded the limit for tip and torque. CONCLUSIONS: Lingual bracket indirect bonding using double vacuum-formed trays fabricated on 3-dimensional printed models has high transfer accuracy in the mesiodistal, buccolingual, and occlusogingival dimensions and rotation. However, the transfer of tip and torque is less accurate.

Use of the universal scan template to achieve a predictable optical impression: Preliminary data of a case series study in complete edentulous patients.

BACKGROUND: Full-arch IOS scan of edentulous areas rehabilitated with dental implants is nowadays still described as an unpredictable procedure. To improve the accuracy, a universal scan template (UST®) is proposed in this article. The clinician can easily assemble the template with a mechanical coupling, by matching the scan bodies with objects of known dimension characterized by specific markers. The UST® facilitates the scanning of an entire arch on scan bodies, reducing the learning curve, simplifying acquisition movements, shortening the scanning time, and drastically reducing the risk of distortions and aberrations of the scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a case series study on 12 patients, the improvement in the accuracy of the scans with UST® was validated by comparing the STL files derived from scans with and without the guide in place. A titanium bar was produced from each optical impression. RESULTS: The bars obtained from the optical impressions taken without UST® were found to be nonpassive in the mouth in the majority of the cases. On the contrary with the use of UST® we obtained 12 passive prosthetic rehabilitations. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed solution may represent a valid method to improve the predictability of full arch optical impressions on implants.

Application of the virtual-fit method for fixed complete denture cases designed on intraoral scans: Effect of cement spacing.

OBJECTIVES: To validate the virtual-fit alignment, analyze the impact of cement spacing on internal/marginal gaps, and correlate results with conventional trueness measures. METHODS: Four dental abutment models were scanned using an industrial reference scanner (one time each), Emerald S (three times each), and Medit i700 (three times each) intraoral scanners (IOS). On each IOS scan (n = 24), three complete-arch fixed frameworks were designed with 70 or 140 µm cement space with no marginal space (groups 70 and 140) and 70 µm with an additional 20 µm space, including the margin (group 70+20). Two types of alignment were performed by GOM Inspect software. The reference and IOS scans were aligned through a conventional iterative closest point algorithm (ICP) where the penetration of the two scans was permitted into each other (conventional trueness method). Second, the computer-aided designs were superimposed with the reference scan also using an ICP, but preventing the design from virtual penetration into the model (virtual-fit method). The virtual-fit algorithm was validated by non-penetration alignment of the designs with the IOS scans. Internal and marginal gap was measured between the design and the abutments. The difference between spacing groups was compared by Friedman's test. A statistical correlation (Spearman's Rho Test) was computed between the measured gaps and the conventional trueness method. A significant difference was accepted at p<0.05 after the Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: The gaps deviated from the set cement space by 3-13 µm on IOS scans (validation of virtual-fit algorithm). The internal gap of the design on the reference scan was not affected by cement spacing (Emerald S, p = 0.779; Medit i700, p = 0.205). The marginal gap in groups 70 and 70+20 was significantly lower than in group 140 in Emerald S (p<0.05). In Medit i700, it was lower in the 70+20 group than in the group 70 (p<0.01) and in the group 140 (p<0.05). Some Medit i700 scans exhibited high marginal gaps within group 70 but not in groups 70 and 140. The measured gaps correlated significantly (r = 0.51-0.81, p<0.05-0.001) with the conventional trueness but were 2.6-4.6 times higher (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Virtual-fit alignment can simulate restoration seating. A 20 µm marginal and 90 µm internal spacing could compensate for scan errors up to several hundred micrometers. However, 140 µm internal spacing is counterproductive. The conventional trueness method could only partially predict framework misfit. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The virtual-fit method can provide clinically interpretable data for intraoral scanners. Emerald S and Medit i700 intraoral scanners are suitable for fabricating complete-arch fixed tooth-supported prostheses. In addition, a slight elevation of spacing at the margin could compensate for moderate inaccuracies in a scan.