口腔医学研究

口腔医学研究 ›› 2022, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (4): 330-334.DOI: 10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2022.04.008

• 口腔种植学研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

辅助配准装置用于严重伪影工况配准精度的研究

吴凯鑫1, 魏路明2, 苏明1, 袁长永1,2, 王鹏来1,2*   

  1. 1.徐州医科大学口腔医学院 江苏 徐州 221004;
    2.徐州医科大学附属口腔医院 江苏 徐州 221002
  • 收稿日期:2021-10-12 出版日期:2022-04-28 发布日期:2022-04-22
  • 通讯作者: *王鹏来,E-mail:wpl0771@163.com
  • 作者简介:吴凯鑫(1996~ ),男,江苏无锡人,硕士在读,研究方向:数字化技术在口腔临床中的应用。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金(编号:81700954)

Study on Registration Accuracy of Auxiliary Registration Device for Severe Artifact Registration

WU Kaixin1, WEI Luming2, SU Ming1, YUAN Changyong1,2, WANG Penglai1,2*   

  1. 1. School of Stomatology, Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou 221004, China;
    2. Affiliated Stomatological Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou 221002, China
  • Received:2021-10-12 Online:2022-04-28 Published:2022-04-22

PDF (PC)

179

摘要： 目的: 探究一种通用型辅助配准装置在具有严重金属伪影的配准工况下,辅助种植虚拟规划前CBCT与光学扫描数据配准的精度。方法: 选择22例接受数字化种植导板技术的牙列缺损患者纳入试验。试验组(11例)为口内含有金属修复体的患者,通过辅助配准装置完成CBCT与光学扫描数据的配准;对照组(11例)为口内不含金属制品的患者,通过匹配牙列特征完成CBCT与光学扫描数据的配准。各组配准完成后,分别对配准结果进行偏差分析,并记录参考模块偏差的标准偏差(SD)、均方根值(RMS)、平均偏差(±AVG)。采用SPSS 25.0软件对相关数据进行统计学分析。结果: 试验组与对照组参考模块偏差的SD、RMS、+AVG、-AVG值分别为(0.16±0.04) mm、(0.17±0.03) mm、(0.14±0.04) mm、(0.15±0.04) mm和(0.14±0.03) mm、(0.16±0.02) mm、(0.13±0.03) mm、(0.13±0.04) mm。两组参考模块的配准偏差间差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。结论: 严重金属伪影的配准工况下,使用辅助配准装置可以获得较为理想的配准精度。

关键词: 种植导板, 图像配准, 锥形束CT, 偏差分析

Abstract: Objective: To explore the registration accuracy of a universal auxiliary registration device for CBCT and optical scanning before virtual implantation planning under severe artifact condition. Methods: Twenty-two patients with dentition defects requiring guided implant surgery were included in the study. Patients with intraoral metal prosthesis were included in the experimental group, and CBCT and model scan were registered using the auxiliary registration device (n=11). Patients without any metal products in the mouth were included in the control group, and the registration was completed with teeth as the registration reference marks (n=11). After the registration of two groups, the registration deviation was analyzed, and the standard deviation (SD), root mean square value (RMS), and mean deviation (±AVG) of the reference blocks' registration deviation were recorded. Results: The registration deviation SD, RMS, +AVG, and -AVG values of the CBCT reconstructed reference block and the optical scan reference block in the experimental group and the control group were (0.16±0.04) mm, (0.17±0.03) mm, (0.14±0.04) mm, (0.15±0.04) mm and (0.14±0.03) mm, (0.16±0.02) mm, (0.13±0.03) mm, (0.13±0.04) mm, respectively. There was no significant difference between the experimental group and the control group (P>0.05). Conclusion: In the case of severe metallic artifact, the general auxiliary registration device can achieve a high registration accuracy.

Key words: implant guide, image registration, cone beam computed tomography, deviation analysis