• Title/Summary/Keyword: GOM Inspect software

Search Result 2, Processing Time 0.02 seconds

Utilization of digital technology in fabricating mandibular implant overdenture for skeletal class II edentulous patient: A case report (2급 악간관계를 보이는 하악 무치악 환자에서 디지털 진단기술을 이용한 임플란트 피개의치 수복증례)

  • Lee, Yeun-Yi;Hong, Seoungjin;Paek, Janghyun;Noh, Kwantae;Kwon, Kung-Rock
    • The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
    • /
    • v.57 no.4
    • /
    • pp.364-373
    • /
    • 2019
  • Unlike class I patients, skeletal class II patients have unstable occlusion thus leading to instability of mandibular complete denture. Therefore, mandibular implant overdenture has been the standard of care due to its advantages in stability and retention. The types of attachments can be divided into two categories: solitary and bar type. The indications vary between two categories. In this clinical report, digital technology was utilized from the implant planning to the choice of appropriate attachment. Implants were placed at the desired location as previously planned in terms of angle and depth. Maxillary removable partial denture and mandibular implant overdenture are expected to have fair prognosis.

Influence of Band and Loop Type Space Maintainer on Intraoral Scanning Accuracy of an Adjacent Tooth

  • Ju Ri Ye;Yong Kwon Chae;Ko Eun Lee;Hyo-Seol Lee;Sung Chul Choi;Ok Hyung Nam
    • Journal of Korean Dental Science
    • /
    • v.16 no.2
    • /
    • pp.149-155
    • /
    • 2023
  • Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the presence of a space maintainer affects the accuracy of an intraoral scanner. Materials and Methods: The maxillary primary first molar typodont tooth was removed from the primary dentition typodont model and a band and loop type space maintainer was delivered. After the model was connected to a dental phantom, intraoral scan was performed using TRIOS 4 (3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark). The scan was repeated with the same technique without the space maintainer. Each scan was performed 10 times. All scan files into a GOM inspect 2018 software and evaluated the accuracy. The accuracy was evaluated on trueness and precision, and calculated using the root mean square value. Result: When there was a space maintainer in the oral cavity, the trueness value was 0.10±0.02 mm and the precision value was 0.15±0.03 mm. In the absence of the space maintainer, the trueness value was 0.12±0.03 mm and the precision value was 0.16±0.04 mm. There were no significant differences depending on the presence of a space maintainer (P>0.05). Conclusion: Within the limits of this study, the accuracy of the intraoral scanner was not influenced by the presence of space maintainer.