A novel in vivo method to evaluate trueness of digital impressions (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Potential of Digital Impression in Orthodontics
Dentistry Journal
Background: Over the past 20 years, there have been many innovations in orthodontic diagnosis and therapy. Among the innovations, there is the taking of dental impressions (DIs). Dental impressions are the negative imprint of hard and soft tissues of one or both arches, and they allow a plaster model to be formed, i.e., a positive reproduction. Traditional dental impressions can be made of different materials, such as alginate, while digital impression is captured by an intra-oral scanner. Digital impression, despite the evident advantages, has not yet replaced the conventional impression. The aim of this study is to evaluate which dental impressions are the most used by dentists. For this purpose, we considered 120 questionnaires sent electronically to patients of different dental private practices from different countries, where the dentists can use both techniques. The results highlighted that the kind of impression adopted is very much influenced by the type of therapy and ortho...
Conventional vs. Digital Dental Impression
International Journal of Reliable and Quality E-Healthcare
Dental impressions are an important part of routine diagnostic and therapeutic dental procedures. Using conventional impression materials, the dentist captures intraoral details, and the dental technician uses impression for dental casts pouring. Intraoral scanners (IOS) are fast, accurate and more pleasant for a patient than conventional impression techniques and became a valid alternative to those procedures. Thirty-four dental students performed alginate and digital impressions on each other and filled two two-part questionnaires to reveal their preferences and expectations from both techniques. The results showed a statistically significant difference in time needed for digital and conventional impressions, with digital being faster. From the patient's perspective, the digital scan was more pleasant than the conventional impression. The majority of participants thought digital techniques would completely replace conventional techniques during their lifetime and find it neces...
Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences, 2019
BACKGROUND Dental implants are one of the most sought-after choice of treatment for restoration and rehabilitation of missing teeth. However, the accuracy of removable or fixed superstructures over the dental implants is influenced for a major proportion by the impression techniques and materials. This paper discusses the comparison of the accuracy of different conventional impression materials and techniques and the intra oral scanners, used in the second stage of the dental implant treatment. The objective of the paper is to compare the accuracy of impressions obtained using conventional impression and intra oral scanners, in the second stage of the dental implant treatment. METHODS In order to perform the study, a PICO framework was formulated, and the topic of the paper was rephrased accordingly. The PICO framework for the topic of interest chosen is outlined. The keywords were thoroughly searched in scientific databases including the Cochrane Library of Databases, PubMed Central, Wiley Online Library and Google Scholar. The key terms used for the search were dental implants, impression materials, impression techniques, digital impression, intra oral scanners, accuracy and success. RESULTS Among the different impression materials taken into the comparative study for the conventional impressions, it was observed that polyvinyl siloxane exhibited a dimensional accuracy slightly greater than polyether. However, light body putty exhibited greater accuracy than medium body putty. Various impression techniques were compared to evaluate the dimensional accuracy of the impression. It was observed that the open tray technique and splinted impression technique produced a more dimensionally stable impression than the other techniques. Among conventional and digital impressions, it was observed that intra oral scanners exhibited a greater degree of accuracy. CONCLUSIONS This study is to comparatively assess the accuracy of conventional and digital impression of dental implants in the second stage of treatment. Although accuracy is greater in digital impressions since there is no likelihood of distortions or dimensional changes or any delay in pouring of models; however, incomplete capture of sub-gingival details, image obscured due to bleeding are possible with intra-oral scanners. Hence, between conventional and digital impressions, the dentist may gradually need to upgrade to the technology and advancements.
Digital Impressions -A Review of Latest Technology in Dentistry
To learn about current technology trends in the field of dentistry. To learn about the use of digital impression machines for taking impressions. To learn about process of taking the impressions. To learn about the shortcomings of digital impressions. DATA: In the article we will know more about digital impressions by learning in detail about the three different scanner systems in use and also comparing them. We will also learn about cons of digital impressions. Also information about the whole process of taking digital impressions is provided in the article. SOURCES: References from various articles have been taken in the article. All of the sources have been stated under references at the end. Wikipedia and Google have also been used extensively for various references. STUDY SELECTION: The main purpose of this article is to know more about the latest technology in dentistry. Impression taking has been an integral part of dentistry. With the introduction of digital impression the whole process of taking traditional impressions which involved a lot of complex steps like tray selection, material mixing, loading, tray placement and removal has been removed and the process of taking digital impressions is lot easier and faster. So to know more about the digital impression this study is selected. CONCLUSION: Dentistry is expanding every day, the field of impressions has been quickly growing with the help of advancement in technology and introduction of digital impression scanner systems.
Comparison of the Clinical Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Dental Implant Impressions.
The aim of this study was to compare the clinical accuracy of digital and conventional dental implant impressions. Two types of implant impressions were made for each case, namely a conventional open-tray impression and a digital implant impression (DII) using a Trios IOS. Master casts were scanned using a D800 laboratory scanner and STL files were retrieved from conventional and digital workflows to be exported for comparison. The distance between center points, angulation, rotation, vertical shift, and surface mis-match of the scan bodies were evaluated and compared between conventional and digital impression techniques. Comparing digital and conventional impression techniques the following factors showed statistically significant differences: distance (73.7±75 µm), angulation (0.42±0.3º), and surface mismatch of scan bodies. The difference in conventional and digital impression techniques as regards to angulation and distance between the implants were associated with distance, angle, and vertical shift differences in scan. The mismatch of the scanned surface of scan bodies was twice higher for the intraoral scanner group. Clinicians should therefore control the implant suprastructures clinically and also using casts (e.g. printed casts) when a digital scan is planned.
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2018
The definitive impression procedure is an important step in prosthesis fabrication. Different impression techniques have been used to generate a definitive cast that will ensure the accurate clinical fit of tooth-or implant-supported prostheses. Restorations fabricated with the digital impression technique have been shown to have similar marginal adaptation to those obtained with the conventional impression technique. 1-3 The conventional implant impression is a well-established technique for transferring the implant position to the dental cast. 4,5 Nevertheless, patients now demand less timeconsuming and more comfortable options. 6 Intraoral scanning in association with computer-aided designcomputer-aided manufacture (CAD-CAM) technology might optimize the treatment workflow by providing more comfort for the patient and accuracy comparable to the conventional treatment. 4,6,7 Additionally, the digital workflow has some advantages over the conventional pathway, such as reducing errors from impression material distortion, 8-12 reducing working time with simplified production processes, 6,10,13,14 lowering cost, 11 and improving patient acceptance. 4,6,7 Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are of increasing interest in dentistry and have been integrated into clinical trials. Patient-reported outcome measures comprise self-administered questionnaires, which provide the patient's perspective regarding their oral health
Evaluation of Virtual Measurements of Scanned Dental Impressions
Introduction: Digital models have been proposed as substitutes for plaster models. Dental arch impression scanning is a rapid and practical approach for digital model obtainment; however, few studies have accessed the accuracy of the method. This study verified the accuracy of virtual measurements obtained with the scanner Ortho Insight 3D, version 5.0 (Motionview Software, LLC, Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA). Materials And Methods: Total of 26 plaster models belonging to the Bahia Federal University Orthodontic postgraduation program were divided into three groups: G1 (plaster models); G2 (alginate impressions scan) and G3 (plaster models scan). Virtual measurements were compared to the manual by evaluating upper intercanine and intermolar distances and the antero posterior distance between upper left canine and upper left molar. Paired Student t and Lin agreement (5% of significance level) were employed for the statistical analysis. Results: Of the evaluated measures, the mean difference ranged from 0.48mm to 0.55mm when compared G2 and G1. The mean difference ranged from 0.6mm to 0.65mm between G3 and G1 groups. Comparing the groups G2 and G3 to G1, it was found statistically significant differences between all variables (p <0.05). There was a substantial agreement (ρc between 0.95-0.99) and almost perfect (ρc> 0.99) for all parameters evaluated. Conclusion: Despite having existed significant differences between the virtual and physical approaches, substantial and almost perfect agreement between them allow us to suggest that there is accuracy of virtual images obtained from scanned impressions in alginate using the laser scanner Ortho Insight 3D.
Digital Impressions in Implant Dentistry: A Literature Review
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2021
Introduction. Digital impressions in implant dentistry rely on many variables, and their accuracy, particularly in complete edentulous patients, is not well understood. Aim. The purpose of this literature review was to determine which factors may influence the accuracy of digital impressions in implant dentistry. Emphasized attention was given to the design of the intra-oral scan body (ISB) and scanning techniques. Materials and methods. A Medline, PubMed and EBSCO Host databases search, complemented by a hand search, was performed in order to select relevant reports regarding the appliance of digital impressions in implant dentistry. The search subject included but was not limited to accuracy of digital impressions in implant dentistry, digital scanning techniques, the design and material of the ISBs, and the depth and angulation of the implant. The related titles and abstracts were screened, and the remaining articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected for full-te...
Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2016
To test whether or not digital full-arch implant impressions with two different intra-oral scanners (CEREC Omnicam and True Definition) have the same accuracy as conventional ones. The hypothesis was that the splinted open-tray impressions would be more accurate than digital fullarch impressions. Material and methods: A stone master cast representing an edentulous mandible using five internal connection implant analogs (Straumann Bone Level RC, Basel, Switzerland) was fabricated. The three median implants were parallel to each other, the far left implant had 10°, and the far right had 15°distal angulation. A splinted open-tray technique was used for the conventional polyether impressions (n = 10) for Group 1. Digital impressions (n = 10) were taken with two intraoral optical scanners (CEREC Omnicam and 3M True Definition) after connecting polymer scan bodies to the master cast for groups 2 and 3. Master cast and conventional impression test casts were digitized with a high-resolution reference scanner (Activity 880 scanner; Smart Optics, Bochum, Germany) to obtain digital files. Standard tessellation language (STL) datasets from the three test groups of digital and conventional impressions were superimposed with the STL dataset from the master cast to assess the 3D deviations. Deviations were recorded as root-mean-square error. To compare the master cast with conventional and digital impressions at the implant level, Welch's F-test was used together with Games-Howell post hoc test. Results: Group I had a mean value of 167.93 lm (SD 50.37); Group II (Omnicam) had a mean value of 46.41 lm (SD 7.34); Group III (True Definition) had a mean value of 19.32 lm (SD 2.77). Welch's F-test was used together with the Games-Howell test for post hoc comparisons. Welch's F-test showed a significant difference between the groups (P < 0.001). The Games-Howell test showed statistically significant 3D deviations for all three groups (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Full-arch digital implant impressions using True Definition scanner and Omnicam were significantly more accurate than the conventional impressions with the splinted open-tray technique. Additionally, the digital impressions with the True Definition scanner had significantly less 3D deviations when compared with the Omnicam.