Architektur verteilter Workflow-Management-Systeme

H. Schuster

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Influence of scan extension and starting quadrant on the accuracy of four intraoral scanners for fabricating tooth-supported crowns

Marta Revilla-León,Miguel Gómez-Polo,Abdul B Barmak,Burak Yilmaz,John C Kois,Jorge Alonso Pérez-Barquero

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.03.017

2024-04-18

Abstract:Statement of problem: Multiple factors can influence the accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs). However, the impact of scan extension and starting quadrant on the accuracy of IOSs for fabricating tooth-supported crowns remains uncertain. Purpose: The purpose of the present in vitro study was to measure the influence of scan extension (half or complete arch scan) and the starting quadrant (same quadrant or contralateral quadrant of the location of the crown preparation) on the accuracy of four IOSs. Material and methods: A typodont with a crown preparation on the left first molar was digitized (T710) to obtain a reference scan. Four scanner groups were created: TRIOS 5, PrimeScan, i700, and iTero. Then, 3 subgroups were defined based on the scan extension and starting quadrant: half arch (HA subgroup), complete arch scan starting on the left quadrant (CA-same subgroup), and complete arch scan starting on the right quadrant (CA-contralateral subgroup), (n=15). The reference scan was used as a control to measure the root mean square (RMS) error discrepancies with each experimental scan on the tooth preparation, margin of the tooth preparation, and adjacent tooth areas. Two-way ANOVA and pairwise multiple comparisons were used to analyze trueness (α=.05). The Levene and pairwise comparisons using the Wilcoxon Rank sum tests were used to analyze precision (α=.05). Results: For the tooth preparation analysis, significant trueness and precision differences were found among the groups (P<.001) and subgroups (P<.001), with a significant interaction group×subgroup (P=.002). The iTero and TRIOS5 groups obtained better trueness than the PrimeScan and i700 groups (P<.001). Moreover, half arch scans obtained the best trueness, while the CA-contralateral scans obtained the worst trueness (P<.001). The iTero group showed the worst precision among the IOSs tested. For the margin of the tooth preparation evaluation, significant trueness and precision differences were found among the groups (P<.001) and subgroups (P<.001), with a significant interaction group×subgroup (P=.005). The iTero group obtained best trueness (P<.001), but the worst precision (P<.001) among the IOSs tested. Half arch scans obtained the best trueness and precision values. For the adjacent tooth analysis, trueness and precision differences were found among the groups (P<.001) and subgroups tested (P<.001), with a significant interaction group×subgroup (P=.005). The TRIOS 5 obtained the best trueness and precision. Half arch scans obtained the best accuracy. Conclusions: Scan extension and the starting quadrant impacted the scanning trueness and precision of the IOSs tested. Additionally, the IOSs showed varying scanning discrepancies depending on the scanning area assessed. Half arch scans presented the highest trueness and precision, and the complete arch scans in which the scan started in the contralateral quadrant of where the crown preparation was obtained the worst trueness and precision.
An encompassing test for non-nested quantile regression models

Chung-Ming Kuan,Hsin-yi Lin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECONLET.2010.01.040

2010-02-19

Abstract:
Influence of implant reference on the scanning accuracy of complete arch implant scans captured by using a photogrammetry system

Marta Revilla-León,Miguel Gómez-Polo,Michael Drone,Abdul B Barmak,Wael Att,John C Kois,Jorge Alonso Pérez-Barquero,Abdul B. Barmak,John C. Kois

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.01.008

IF: 4.148

2024-01-25

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Abstract:Statement of problem Photogrammetry has been reported to be a reliable digital alternative for recording implant positions; however, the factors that may impact the accuracy of photogrammetry techniques remain unknown. Purpose The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess the influence of the implant reference on the accuracy of complete arch implant scans acquired by using a photogrammetry system. Material and methods An edentulous cast with 6 implant abutment analogs (MultiUnit Abutment Plus Replica) was obtained and digitized by using a laboratory scanner (T710; Medit). A photogrammetry system (PIC System) was selected to obtain complete arch implant scans. An optical marker (PIC Transfer, HC MUA Metal; PIC Dental) was positioned on each implant abutment of the reference cast. Each optical marker code and position was determined in the photogrammetry software program. Three groups were created based on the implant reference selected before acquiring the photogrammetry scans: right first molar (IPR-3 group), left canine (IPR-11 group), and left first molar (IPR-14 group) (n=30). Euclidean linear and angular measurements were obtained on the digitized reference cast and used to compare the discrepancies with the same measurements obtained on each experimental scan. One-way ANOVA and the Tukey tests were used to analyze the trueness data. The Levene test was used to analyze the precision values (α=.05 for all tests). Results One-way ANOVA revealed significant linear ( P =.003) and angular ( P =.009) trueness differences among the groups tested. Additionally, the Tukey test showed that the IPR-11 and IPR-14 groups had significantly different linear ( P <.001) and angular trueness ( P <.001). The Levene test showed no significant precision linear ( P =.197) and angular ( P =.235) discrepancies among the groups tested. The IPR-3 group obtained the highest trueness ( P <.001) and precision ( P <.001) values among the groups tested. Conclusions Implant reference impacted the accuracy of complete arch implant scans obtained by using the photogrammetry system tested. However, a trueness ±precision linear discrepancy of 6 ±3 μm and an angular discrepancy of 0.01 ±0.01 degrees were measured among the groups tested; therefore, the impact of the discrepancy measured should not be clinically significant.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Effect of different surface locking patterns on the trueness of complete arch digital implant scans: An in vitro study

Elissa Kondakji,Ghida Lawand,Wassim Yaacoub,Hani Tohme

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.05.019

Abstract:Statement of problem: The effect of different surface locking patterns on the trueness of a digital implant scan of a completely edentulous arch remains uncertain. Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate whether locking surfaces with different patterns affected the trueness of complete arch implant digital scans. Material and methods: An edentulous maxillary cast with 4 implants (2 anterior implants parallel and 2 posterior implants tilted at 17 degrees) was fabricated. Four implant-level scan bodies were fixed onto the implants, and the cast was scanned with a desktop scanner to create the reference file. Four groups (L0, L1, L2, and L3) were formed, each with a distinct locking surface configuration, and all scans were made using the same intraoral scanner. L0 kept all 4 implant-level scan bodies during scanning. L1 involved removing the right first premolar (RPM) scan body, scanning the other 3 implant scan bodies, then reattaching the RPM's scan body, and continuing scanning. In L2, the RPM and right lateral incisor (RIC) scan bodies were removed, followed by scanning the left implants to create a locking surface, and scanning the right implants. In L3, only the left posterior molar's (LPM) scan body was retained and scanned; then a locking surface was generated, and then the remaining implants were scanned. A metrology software program (Geomagic Control X) was used for comparison. Statistical analyses were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis, the 1-way ANOVA, the Welch ANOVA, the Friedman test, the repeated-measures ANOVA, the Bonferroni post hoc test, and the Games-Howell post hoc test (α=.05). Results: Significant 3D surface deviations were observed in the coronal bevel (CB) region and in the entire scan bodies when assessing trueness in the L0, L1, L2, and L3 groups (P<.001). L2 exhibited the highest discrepancies in 3D surface deviation for CB (0.030 ±0.002 mm) and implant scan bodies (0.357 ±0.052 mm) and distance deviation, while the highest mean angular deviation values were found in L0 (0.924 ±0.131 degrees). Conclusions: Locking half of the arch showed the highest trueness discrepancies when performing digital scans for complete arch implant-supported prostheses.
Influence of connected and nonconnected calibrated frameworks on the accuracy of complete arch implant scans obtained by using four intraoral scanners, a desktop scanner, and a photogrammetry system

Marta Revilla-León,Abdul B. Barmak,Alejandro Lanis,John C. Kois

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.01.017

IF: 4.148

2024-03-06

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Abstract:Statement of problem Different techniques have been proposed for increasing the accuracy of complete arch implant scans obtained by using intraoral scanners (IOSs), including a calibrated metal framework (IOSFix); however, its accuracy remains uncertain. Purpose The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of complete arch scans obtained with connecting and non-connecting the implant scan bodies (ISBs) recorded using intraoral scanners (IOSs), a laboratory scanner (LBS), and photogrammetry (PG). Material and methods A cast with 6 implant abutment analogs was obtained. Six groups were created: TRIOS 4, i700, iTero, CS3800, LBS, and PG groups. The IOSs and LBS groups were divided into 3 subgroups: nonconnected ISBs (ISB), splinted ISBs (SSB), and calibrated framework (CF), (n=15). For the ISB subgroups, an ISB was positioned on each implant abutment analog. For the SSB subgroups, a printed framework was used to connect the ISBs. For the CF subgroups, a calibrated framework (IOSFix) was used to connect the ISBs. For the PG group, scans were captured using a PG (PIC Camera). Implant positions of the reference cast were measured using a coordinate measurement machine, and Euclidean distances were used as a reference to calculate the discrepancies using the same distances obtained on each experimental scan. Wilcoxon squares 2-way ANOVA and pairwise multiple comparisons were used to analyze trueness (α=.05). The Levene test was used to analyze precision (α=.05). Results Linear and angular discrepancies were found among the groups ( P <.001) and subgroups ( P <.001). Linear ( P =.008) and angular ( P <.001) precision differences were found among the subgroups. Conclusions The digitizing method and technique impacted the trueness and precision of the implant scans. The photogrammetry and calibrated framework groups obtained the best accuracy. Except for TRIOS 4, the calibrated framework method improved the accuracy of the scans obtained by using the IOSs tested.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Dating Geomagnetic Polarity Epochs in Réunion

F. H. Chamalaun,I. Mcdougall

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/2101212A0

IF: 64.8

1966-06-18

Nature

Abstract:
In vitro comparative study between complete arch conventional implant impressions and digital implant scans with scannable pick-up impression copings

Julián Conejo,Thomas H. Yoo,Pablo J. Atria,Howard Fraiman,Markus B. Blatz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.12.012

IF: 4.148

2024-01-05

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Abstract:Statement of problem Intraoral digital scan techniques have been widely used and sufficient evidence supports this technique in partially edentulous patients. However, the evidence supporting the use of intraoral scanners (IOSs) for edentulous patients is limited. Purpose The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure and compare the accuracy of complete arch conventional pick-up implant impressions with open and closed trays, complete arch digital implant scans with IOSs, and 3-dimensional (3D) printed casts from complete arch digital implant scans. Material and methods Six implants were placed in a mandibular model. Scannable pick-up impression copings were inserted in the implants, scanned with a reference scanner, and exported in standard tessellation language (STL) format (Group Control). Splinted open-tray pick-up impressions (Group OT, n=5) and closed-tray pick-up impressions (Group CT, n=5) were made, and stone casts were fabricated. Digital scans (Group DS, n=5) were made with an IOS, and the STL files were exported to fabricate 3D-printed casts (Group STL, n=5). Scannable pick-up impression copings were inserted in the dental implant analogs in Groups OT, CT, and STL and scanned with the reference scanner. Using a 3D inspection software program, the recording techniques were compared with the control. Root mean square (RMS) values were calculated from the control, and superimposed digitized casts from different recording techniques. Analysis of variance was used to determine differences in RMS values, and theTukey post hoc test was used to determine difference between different groups. Results Group CT had the lowest mean dimensional difference when superimposed with Group Control, followed by Groups DS, OT, and STL. Significant differences were found in RMS values between Control and digitized casts fabricated with different techniques ( P <.05). The post hoc Tukey test revealed that Group DS ( P <.05) was significantly different from the other groups, while no significant difference was found among Groups CT, OT, and STL ( P >.05). Conclusions Based on the findings of the present study, 3D printed casts from digital scans have the same accuracy as stone casts from conventional impressions in complete arch implant cases. Intraoral scans had the highest accuracy. Complete arch pick-up impression techniques using dual-functioning scannable pick-up impression copings are as accurate as splinted complete arch pick-up impressions.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Scanning accuracy with splinted and unsplinted implant scan bodies for the edentulous arch at implant level: an in vitro study

Antoanela Garbacea,Ali F Alqahtani,Brian Goodacre,Abdulaziz Alhelal,Jaime Lozada,Mathew T Kattadiyil

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-21-00293

2022-07-11

Abstract:Accuracy of completely edentulous arch scanning with implant scan bodies has not been completely validated for intraoral scanners. For desktop laboratory scanners validations were found in the literature. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the dimensional accuracy of scanning with splinted and unsplinted scan bodies on a completely edentulous maxillary arch with 6 implants. A maxillary edentulous master cast with 6 implants was used as control for all implant level impressions. 6 implants were digitally planned and placed at different angulation of 0, 0 17° and 30°. A contact coordinate measuring machine (CMM) was used to generate baseline linear measurements of the master cast. Four test groups included: 2 intraoral scanners Trios (3shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) and True Definition (3M ESPE, St Paul, MN), one industrial scanner Atos (Core optical 3D scanner) and one conventional impression group scanned with laboratory scanner Dental Wings 7 Series. Each scan recording was made with splinted and unsplinted scan bodies. Digital datasets of all measurements were compared with the CMM baseline values using PolyWorks® InnovMetric Software in order to assess the linear and angular deviations and determine the accuracy of complete arch digital impression. Factorial ANOVA showed significant effect with splinting, scanner type, inter-implant distance and implant angulation for linear deviations. Splinted scan bodies revealed elevated linear and angular deviation values for all scanners with significantly highest deviations for True Definition scanner. Significant correlation was found between inter-implant distance and linear deviation (r =0.45, P =<0.001) with increased linear deviations among all scanners, regardless of splinting. ( P <0.05). Significant effect on accuracy was seen for angular deviation with splinting, scanner type and implant angulation; significant difference was found between 0° and 30° implant angulation ( P =0.035) with more deviation with 30° implant angulation. The accuracy of the complete arch implant digital impression using splinted scan bodies was significantly reduced for measurements that crossed the arch midline. The digital impression technique using a broad splint design to connect scan bodies was not found to improve the scan accuracy for intraoral scanners.
Impact of scanning distance on the accuracy of a photogrammetry system

Marta Revilla-León,Miguel Gómez-Polo,Michael Drone,Abdul B Barmak,Clara Guinot-Barona,Wael Att,John C Kois,Jorge Alonso Pérez-Barquero

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2024.104854

Abstract: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 .
Carpal tunnel syndrome. A new feature in the natural history of TOS?

E. Estirado de Cabo,M. Posada de la Paz,P. de Andrés Copa,Mar del Mar Plaza Cano,M. L. García De Aguinaga,C. Suárez Alvarez,B. Braun Saro

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025899506009

European Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract:
Trueness of Intraoral Scanners in Different Scan Patterns for Full-Arch Digital Implant Impressions

Taygun Sezer,Emir Esim,Erkan Yılmaz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-24-00054

2024-08-01

Journal of Oral Implantology

Abstract:The optimal scan pattern for full-arch digital implant impressions remains to be determined. This study aimed to analyze the effects of different scan patterns on the trueness of intraoral scanners for full-arch digital implant impressions. A maxillary plaster model with 4 implant analogs was employed as the master model. Scan bodies were attached to the master model and scanned with a laboratory scanner to obtain reference data. Test scans were obtained using 3 different scan patterns with Cerec Primescan and Trios 3. Each test datum was superimposed onto the reference data. The trueness was assessed by determining the 3D distance and angular deviations between the test and reference data. Significant differences in 3D distance deviation were detected among the scan patterns for both scanners. Significant differences in angle deviation were detected among the scan patterns for the Cerec Primescan, whereas it was not substantial for the Trios 3. Cerec Primescan exhibited superior trueness across all scan patterns compared with Trios 3. The zigzag pattern resulted in more accurate scans for the Cerec Primescan, whereas both the zigzag and occlusal-palatal-buccal patterns showed higher accuracy for the Trios 3.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Effect of stabilization of patients on the accuracy and scanning time of maxillary dentate quadrants: A clinical study

Elia Daccache,Carole Abi Ghosn Yared,Lara Nasr,Ghida Laawand,Hani Tohme

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.09.022

2023-10-27

Abstract:Statement of problem: As intraoral scanning has gained widespread acceptance as an alternative to conventional impression-making, numerous studies have evaluated the influence of operator-related factors and patient-related factors on scanning accuracy. While several authors have noted patient movements as a clinical limitation of scanning technologies, research providing empirical data or testing this hypothesis is lacking. Purpose: The purpose of this clinical study was to assess the effect of using the Zero Motion Scanning Band, a silicone occlusal mouth prop, and an OptraGate lip retractor for stabilizing the head and jaw on the accuracy (trueness and precision) and scanning time of digital quadrant scans. Material and methods: A conventional impression was made of the maxillary right quadrant with polyvinyl siloxane material and then digitized using a calibrated extraoral scanner to create the reference file. Two different groups were created: no scanning aids (NSA) and with scanning aids (WSA). For the NSA group, scans were made without considering the participant's movements. For the WSA group, scans included the Zero Motion Scanning Band, a silicone occlusal mouth prop, and an OptraGate lip retractor. Sixty-four scans were captured with an intraoral scanner (TRIOS 3) for each group, and the scanning time was recorded. Using an inspection and metrology software program, scans of each group were superimposed on the reference file to determine 3-dimensional (3D) deviations. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test evaluated the normality of the distribution of variables, and the Mann-Whitney U test was selected for data analysis of non-normally distributed variables, including 3D deviations and scanning time (α=.05). Results: Significant differences for trueness and scanning time mean values were observed under different scanning conditions: with and without head and jaw positioning (P<.05). The modified scan protocol exhibited higher trueness, with smaller mean root mean square values of 38.4 ±2.7 µm compared with 40.8 ±3.1 µm in the nonmodified group. However, precision did not display a statistically significant difference with varying scanning conditions (P>.05). Conclusions: The use of the Zero Motion Scanning Band, a lip retractor, and a silicone occlusal mouth prop on the contralateral side of the scanned quadrant significantly improved the trueness and scanning time of the quadrant digital scan. Further evaluation of head and jaw stabilizing tools is recommended in more complex clinical scenarios, such as complete arch digital scans and scanning implant-supported restorations.
Drowning prevention system-at sea level

S. Sivakami,K. Janani,R. Ranjana

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCCT2.2017.7972308

2017-02-01

Abstract:Drowning is usually quick and silent. Media portrayal of drowning as a loud, violent struggle have much more in common with distressed unskilled swimmers, Drowning causes the third highest number of unintentional death. Many drowning prevention systems have been proposed however they are not suitable for implementation at sea level. Our target to abide a cryptogram lapse prevents drowning at the beaches. Two sensors namely oxygen sensor and water detector are used. Water detectors are placed in the locket. This is suitable for people who play at the shore; who don't go deep into beaches. If a person gets pulled into the sea by the waves, the water detector in their locket will be submerged completely and if the detector continues to remain submerged then an alarm is triggered through which the coast guards are alerted. Oxygen sensor used for swimmers and is placed in the armbands of the swimmer. Oxygen level in the sea and the oxygen level in the atmosphere vary drastically. If a swimmer is about to drown the oxygen level will constantly be around 80 per cent (which is the normal oxygen residue in the sea); Then the sensor triggers a floating aide and simultaneously alerts the coast guards. An underwater network is deployed with a modem at each network node. The sensors communicate with these nodes. Similarly, sensors are placed on the seabed to indicate sudden increase in depth. When a user is about to cross those sensors the controller alerts the coastguards and the swimmer.
Influence of implant position on the accuracy of intraoral scanning in fully edentulous arches: A systematic review

Ana Larisse Carneiro Pereira,Vitória Ramos Medeiros,Adriana da Fonte Porto Carreiro

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.09.008

Abstract:Statement of problem: Parallel dental implants improve prosthesis longevity and facilitate the impression making steps when compared with angled implants. The effect of implant angulation on the accuracy of casts generated by using intraoral scanners has not been fully investigated. Purpose: The present systematic review addressed following the patient, intervention, control, and outcome (PICO) question: Does implant position affect the intraoral scanning accuracy of arches that will receive complete-arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses? Material and methods: A bibliographic search was performed in the Medline-PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases by using specific descriptors for studies published until July 2020. All studies evaluated the intraoral scanning accuracy of arches rehabilitated with multiple implants through implant linear and/or angular deviation. Results: Eight in vitro studies that met the eligibility criteria were evaluated. Five publications showed lower linear and angular displacements for the digital scans compared with the conventional technique. Two studies showed that the digital scan presented higher angular and linear distortions than the conventional technique. Only 1 study did not find differences between the 2 recording methods. Conclusions: Digital scanning is reliable. However, caution is needed concerning its indication, especially in patients where the angles between implants are greater than 15 degrees. The association of the implant angulation with the clinical factors needs to be further investigated. The absence of clinical evidence and methodological heterogeneity limited the results of this study.
Influence of intraoral scanning coverage on the accuracy of digital implant impressions – An in vitro study

Zhen-Yu Wang,Yu Gong,Fei Liu,Du Chen,Jia-Wen Zheng,Jie-Fei Shen,Zhen-yu Wang,Jia-wen Zheng,Jie-fei Shen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2024.104929

IF: 4.991

2024-04-01

Journal of Dentistry

Abstract: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.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Accuracy of edentulous full‐arch implant impression: An in vitro comparison between conventional impression, intraoral scan with and without splinting, and photogrammetry

Jing Cheng,Haidong Zhang,Hailin Liu,Junying Li,Hom‐Lay Wang,Xian Tao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14252

2024-03-02

Clinical Oral Implants Research

Abstract:Objectives The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the trueness and precision of complete arch implant impressions using conventional impression, intraoral scanning with and without splinting, and stereophotogrammetry. Materials and Methods An edentulous model with six implants was used in this study. Four implant impression techniques were compared: the conventional impression (CI), intraoral scanning (IOS) without splinting, intraoral scanning with splinting (MIOS), and stereophotogrammetry (SPG). An industrial blue light scanner was used to generate the baseline scan from the model. The CI was captured with a laboratory scanner. The reference best‐fit method was then applied in the computer‐aided design (CAD) software to compute the three‐dimensional, angular, and linear discrepancies among the four impression techniques. The root mean square (RMS) 3D discrepancies in trueness and precision between the four impression groups were analyzed with a Kruskal–Wallis test. Trueness and precision between single analogs were assessed using generalized estimating equations. Results Significant differences in the overall trueness (p = .017) and precision (p .05). Conclusions Stereophotogrammetry showed superior trueness and precision, meeting misfit thresholds for implant‐supported complete arch prostheses. Intraoral scanning, while accurate like conventional impressions, exhibited cross‐arch angular and linear deviations. Adding a splint to the scan body did not improve intraoral scanning accuracy.

engineering, biomedical,dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Accuracy of Impressions for Multiple Implants: A Comparative Study of Digital and Conventional Techniques

Mingyue Lyu,Ping Di,Ye Lin,Xi Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.01.016

IF: 4.148

2021-01-01

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Abstract:Statement of problem. Intraoral scanning has benefits over conventional impression making, but whether scanning is sufficiently accurate for multiple implants is unclear.Purpose. The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the trueness of digital scans acquired by using intraoral scanners from a small range to a complete arch with the conventional impression technique and to determine the influence of 2 different evaluation methods (best -fit algorithm versus absolute linear deviation) on the outcomes of accuracy assessment.Material and methods. A mandibular model with 8 implants (A-H) around an edentulous arch was used as the master model. Open-format standard tessellation language (STL) data sets (1 reference file from a highly accurate dental laboratory scanner, 10 files from an intraoral scanner, and 10 files from digitized conventional impressions at room temperature) were imported to a metrology software program, and 5 groups of scanning ranges (AB, FGH, CDEF, BCDEFG, and ABCDEFGH) were identified simulating different clinical situations. Two evaluation methods -root mean square values calculated from the best -fit algorithm and average value of linear discrepancies from absolute linear deviation -were used to describe the trueness values. The impacts of different scanning or impression methods, ranges, and evaluation methods were tested by using a 3-way ANOVA. The effect of the scanning range on accuracy was further identified with 1-way ANOVA. The paired-sample t test was used to determine the differences of trueness values between the 2 methods in different groups.Results. The trueness values of the implant impressions were significantly affected by different scanning or impression methods (P<.001), evaluation methods (P<.001), and scanning ranges (P<.001) as independent variables. With use of the best -fit algorithm, deviations from the digital scans were significantly greater than those from the conventional impressions in cross -arch situations (groups CDEF, BCDEFG, and ABCDEFGH). With use of the absolute linear deviation method, statistically significant lower accuracy was found when larger areas were encountered (groups BCDEFG and ABCDEFGH). Use of the absolute linear deviation method resulted in a higher mean score of inaccuracy than that from the best -fit algorithm method in most situations.Conclusions. Scanning or impression methods, ranges, and evaluation methods affected the dimensional accuracy (trueness) of scans or impressions with multiple implants. Digital scans had worse trueness values compared with those made with the conventional splinting open-tray technique when cross-arch implant impressions were acquired. (J Prosthet Dent 2022;128:1017-23)
Accuracy of Digital Implant Impressions Using a Novel Structured Light Scanning System Assisted by a Planar Mirror in the Edentulous Maxilla: an in Vitro Study

Yifang Ke,Yaopeng Zhang,Sukun Tian,Hu Chen,Yuchun Sun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14208

2023-01-01

Clinical Oral Implants Research

Abstract:Objectives: This study aimed to develop a structured light scanning system with a planar mirror to enhance the digital full-arch implant impression accuracy and to compare it with photogrammetry and intraoral scanner methods.Materials and Methods: An edentulous maxillary stone cast with six scan bodies was scanned as the reference model using a laboratory scanner. Three scanning modalities were compared (n = 10): (1) self-developed structured light scanning with a mirror (SSLS); (2) intraoral scanner (IOS); and (3) photogrammetry system (PG). The scanners were stopped for 1 min after each scan. Six scan bodies were analysed within each scan model. Linear deviations between the scan bodies (1-2, 1-3, 1-4, 1-5, and 1-6) and 3D mucosal deviations were established. The overall deviation was calculated as the mean of all linear deviations. "Trueness" represented the discrepancy between the test and reference files, while "precision" denoted the consistency among the test files. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for statistical analyses.Results: Significant overall linear discrepancies were noted among the SSLS, PG, and IOS groups (p < .001). SSLS showed the best overall trueness and precision (6.6, 5.7 mu m), followed by PG (58.4, 6.8 mu m) and IOS (214.6, 329.1 mu m). For the 3D mucosal deviation, the trueness (p < .001) and precision (p < .001) of the SSLS group were significantly better than those of the IOS group.Conclusions: The SSLS exhibited higher accuracy in determining the implant positions than the PG and IOS. Additionally, it demonstrated better accuracy in capturing the mucosa than IOS.
Coordinate-based data analysis of the accuracy of five intraoral scanners for scanning completely dentate and partially edentulous mandibular arches

Xin Wang,Fang Zhang,Dan Ma,Xiaolan Ye,Xiaojuan Zheng,Ruifang Ren,Shizhu Bai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.01.009

IF: 4.148

2024-02-12

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Abstract:Statement of problem Current methods for assessing the accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs) that reduce errors and provide comprehensive data compared with previous methods are lacking. Purpose The purpose of this in vitro study was to present a coordinate-based data analysis method to compare the accuracy of 5 IOSs for scanning completely dentate and partially edentulous casts. Material and methods Reference scans of 2 complete arch casts (completely and partially dentate) were digitized using a high-precision laboratory scanner (Ceramill Map 600). Each cast was scanned 10 times each using 5 IOSs (3Shape TRIOS 3, Planmeca Emerald, iTero Element 5D, Medit i500, and Shining Aoralscan 3). The dataset of all 10 test groups was analyzed by using a reverse engineering software program (Geomagic Wrap). Each test cast was aligned with the reference cast by 3-dimensional (3D) superimposition to determine the translation and rotation along the x-, y-, and z-axes. The dataset was analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis and post hoc Bonferroni tests (α=.05). Results Significant differences were observed in all parameters among all scanners when scanning the same cast ( P <.05). Significant differences were observed in at least 1 parameter for all scanners, except Element 5D after scanning different casts using the same scanner. Deviations in the test data generally relocated toward the mesial, buccal, and apical sides, and the casts were almost always rotated clockwise around the y-axis and counterclockwise around the z-axis. For the completely dentate cast, among all IOSs, Element 5D demonstrated the highest accuracy in most of the measured parameters, specifically in the y-axis translation (0.06[0.07] mm), z-axis translation (0.08[0.05] mm), and y-axis rotation (0.21[0.16] degree) ( P <.05). For the partially edentulous cast, Element 5D displayed higher accuracy in most of the measured parameters, including the x-axis translation (0.11[0.14] mm) and z-axis rotation (0.12[0.18] degree) ( P <.05). Emerald also displayed higher accuracy in most of the measured parameters, including the y-axis translation (0.05[0.08] mm) and y-axis rotation (0.14[0.12] degree) ( P <.05). Element 5D exhibited no difference in the scanning accuracy between the 2 types of casts ( P >.05). Conclusions Element 5D offered a high level of accuracy and was an appropriate scanner for both situations. The method presented in this study provides a good assessment of accuracy deviations in complete arch scans using 3D coordinate-based data analysis.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
Influence of the number of scan bodies on full-arch implant scanning: A comparison of 2 vs 4 implants

Aly Abdelrehim,Nosizana Mohd Salleh,Hazrina Sofian,Eshamsul Sulaiman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-23-00063

2024-02-15

Journal of Oral Implantology

Abstract:Accuracy is a necessity in implant impressions to fabricate accurately fitting implant-supported prostheses. This in vitro study aimed to explore the impact of the number of scan bodies on scanning quality by comparing scans of 2 versus 4 implants, and to determine if their accuracy and precision meets acceptable clinical threshold. Two mandibular edentulous models were used: one with 4-parallel implants (4-IM) and the other with 2-parallel implants (2-IM). Each model was scanned ten times with an intraoral scanner, while reference scans were obtained with a high-precision laboratory scanner. The accuracy of test scans was evaluated by superimposing them onto reference scans and measuring 3D and angular deviations of the scan bodies. To assess the precision, the repeatability of the scans was analyzed by measuring the 3D standard deviations. Independent t-test was used to compare angular deviations, the Mann-Whitney U test was used for 3D deviations and 3D standard deviations, and one sample t-test was used for comparing means to the clinical threshold. Angular and 3D deviations were statistically not significant between the two groups (P=0.054 and 0.143). 3D deviation values were higher than the 150 μm threshold for 2-IM (201 μm) and 4-IM (290 μm); angular deviation in 2-IM was 0.600 degrees and 0.885 degrees for 4-IM. There was no statistically significant difference in the precision of scans between the two groups. (P=0.161). Although scanning quality improved when 2 scan bodies were used, the difference was not statistically significant. Moreover, full-arch implant scanning did not meet acceptable levels of accuracy and precision.

dentistry, oral surgery & medicine

Architektur verteilter Workflow-Management-Systeme

Influence of scan extension and starting quadrant on the accuracy of four intraoral scanners for fabricating tooth-supported crowns

An encompassing test for non-nested quantile regression models

Influence of implant reference on the scanning accuracy of complete arch implant scans captured by using a photogrammetry system

Effect of different surface locking patterns on the trueness of complete arch digital implant scans: An in vitro study

Influence of connected and nonconnected calibrated frameworks on the accuracy of complete arch implant scans obtained by using four intraoral scanners, a desktop scanner, and a photogrammetry system

Dating Geomagnetic Polarity Epochs in Réunion

In vitro comparative study between complete arch conventional implant impressions and digital implant scans with scannable pick-up impression copings

Scanning accuracy with splinted and unsplinted implant scan bodies for the edentulous arch at implant level: an in vitro study

Impact of scanning distance on the accuracy of a photogrammetry system

Carpal tunnel syndrome. A new feature in the natural history of TOS?

Trueness of Intraoral Scanners in Different Scan Patterns for Full-Arch Digital Implant Impressions

Effect of stabilization of patients on the accuracy and scanning time of maxillary dentate quadrants: A clinical study

Drowning prevention system-at sea level

Influence of implant position on the accuracy of intraoral scanning in fully edentulous arches: A systematic review

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

Accuracy of edentulous full‐arch implant impression: An in vitro comparison between conventional impression, intraoral scan with and without splinting, and photogrammetry

Accuracy of Impressions for Multiple Implants: A Comparative Study of Digital and Conventional Techniques

Accuracy of Digital Implant Impressions Using a Novel Structured Light Scanning System Assisted by a Planar Mirror in the Edentulous Maxilla: an in Vitro Study

Coordinate-based data analysis of the accuracy of five intraoral scanners for scanning completely dentate and partially edentulous mandibular arches

Influence of the number of scan bodies on full-arch implant scanning: A comparison of 2 vs 4 implants