Effect of Scanning Method and Surface Characteristics of Model on Scanning Accuracy of Full Dentition

doi:10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2022.03.013

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To assess the effect of surface characteristics of the model and the scanning method on the accuracy of direct intraoral scanning. Methods: The upper and lower dentition models made of plaster and resin were scanned 6 times with a laboratory scanner and an intraoral scanner to verify the precision of the scanner. Then, the digital model obtained by the laboratory scanner was taken as the reference model, and the intraoral scanning data using three different scanning methods was set as the registration model. Through the three-dimensional registration technology, the difference in both models was observed. Results: For precision of laboratory scanning, there was no statistical differences between the upper and lower dentition of the plaster model [(15.03±1.61) μm and (16.13±1.68) μm, P>0.05], while the resin model had statistical differences [(75.92±15.52) μm and (48.51±9.27) μm, P<0.05]. For precision of intraoral scanning, there was no statistical difference between three scanning methods for both plaster and resin models. For trueness of intraoral scanning, the sequential scanning method [(73.67±21.08) μm, (52.88±8.23)μm] was significantly higher than duplex scanning method and cross scanning method in plaster model (P<0.05), while there was no statistical difference among three scanning methods for resin model (P>0.05). The accuracy of the plaster model was generally greater than that of the resin model (P<0.05). Conclusion: The surface characteristics of the model and the scanning method will affect the accuracy of the scan data. Specific scanning procedures should be used for direct intraoral scanning of full dentition.

Key words: intraoral scan, scanning method, three-dimensional registration, precision, trueness

GAO Maomao, GUO Xiaoyang, MA Xiaoping, LI Shaoping, CHEN Zhiyu. Effect of Scanning Method and Surface Characteristics of Model on Scanning Accuracy of Full Dentition[J]. Journal of Oral Science Research, 2022, 38(3): 256-260.

References

[1] Gallardo YR, Bohner L, Tortamano P, et al. Patient outcomes and procedure working time for digital versus conventional impressions: A systematic review [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2018,119(2):214-219.
[2] Mennito AS, Evans ZP, Lauer AW, et al. Evaluation of the effect scan pattern has on the trueness and precision of six intraoral digital impression systems [J]. J Esthet Restor Dent, 2018, 30(2):113-118.
[3] Müller P, Ender A, Joda T, et al. Impact of digital intraoral scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the TRIOS Pod scanner [J]. Quintessence Int, 2016, 47(4):343-349.
[4] 苏庭舒,孙健,陈丽萍.口内数字化印模扫描重复性的研究[J].口腔颌面修复学杂志,2014,15(5):291-296.
[5] DeLong R, Pintado MR, Ko CC, et al. Factors influencing optical 3D scanning of vinyl polysiloxane impression materials [J]. J Prosthodont, 2001, 10(2):78-85.
[6] 谢轶伦,沈刚.全口牙列口内扫描的精确性与可重复性分析[J].上海口腔医学,2016,25(5):593-599.
[7] Kim RJ, Park JM, Shim JS. Accuracy of 9 intraoral scanners for complete-arch image acquisition: A qualitative and quantitative evaluation [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2018, 120(6):895-903.
[8] Del'Acqua MA, Arioli-Filho JN, Compagnoni MA, et al. Accuracy of impression and pouring techniques for an implant -supported prosthesis [J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2008, 23(2): 226-236.
[9] Diker B, Tak Ö. Accuracy of six intraoral scanners for scanning complete-arch and 4-unit fixed partial dentures: An in vitro study [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2021:S0022-3913(20)30797-6.
[10] International Organization for Standardization. Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results-Part 1: General principles and definitions (ISO 5725-1:1994)[S]. Berlin: Beuth Verlag GmbH,1997.
[11] Berry J, O'Malley BW Jr, Humphries S, et al. Making image guidance work: understanding control of accuracy [J]. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 2003, 112(8):689-692.
[12] Schaefer O, Watts DC, Sigusch BW, et al. Marginal and internal fit of pressed lithium disilicate partial crowns in vitro: a three-dimensional analysis of accuracy and reproducibility [J]. Dent Mater, 2012, 28(3):320-326.
[13] 宋杨,孙玉春,赵一姣,等.牙颌模型三维扫描仪精度定量评价[J].北京大学学报(医学版),2013,45(1):140-144.
[14] Dutton E, Ludlow M, Mennito A, et al. The effect different substrates have on the trueness and precision of eight different intraoral scanners [J]. J Esthet Restor Dent, 2020, 32(2):204-218.
[15] 王勇.口内数字印模技术[J].口腔医学,2015,35(9):705-709+743.
[16] Belser UC, MacEntee MI, Richter WA. Fit of three porcelain-fused-to-metal marginal designs in vivo: a scanning electron microscope study [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 1985, 53(1):24-29.
[17] Abduo J, Elseyoufi M. Accuracy of intraoral scanners: A systematic review of influencing factors [J]. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent, 2018, 26(3):101-121.
[18] Oh KC, Park JM, Moon HS. Effects of scanning strategy and scanner type on the accuracy of intraoral scans: A new approach for assessing the accuracy of scanned data [J]. J Prosthodont, 2020, 29(6):518-523.
[19] Latham J, Ludlow M, Mennito A, et al. Effect of scan pattern on complete-arch scans with 4 digital scanners [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2020,123(1):85-95.