• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• 제12권5호
• /
• pp.299-306
• /
• 2020

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of six recently introduced intraoral scanners (IOSs) for single crown preparations isolated from the complete arch, and to determine the effect of scanning sequence on accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A complete arch with right and left canine preparations for single crowns was used as a study model. The reference dataset was obtained by scanning the complete arch using a highly accurate industrial scanner (ATOS Core 80, GOM GmbH). Six different IOSs (Trios, iTero, Planmeca Emerald, Cerec Omnicam, Primescan, and Virtuo Vivo) were used to scan the model ten times each. The scans performed with each IOS were divided into two groups, based on whether the scanning sequence started from the right or left quadrant (n=5). The accuracy of digital impression was evaluated using three-dimensional analyzing software (Geomagic Studio 12, 3D Systems). The Kruskal Wallis and Mann- Whitney U statistical tests for trueness analysis and the One-way ANOVA test for precision analysis were performed (α=.05). RESULTS. The trueness and precision values were the lowest with the Primescan (25 and 10 ㎛), followed by Trios (40.5 and 11 ㎛), Omnicam (41.5 ㎛ and 18 ㎛), Virtuo Vivo (52 and 37 ㎛), iTero (70 and 12 ㎛) and Emerald (73.5 and 60 ㎛). Regarding trueness, iTero showed more deviation when scanning started from the right (P=.009). CONCLUSION. The accuracy of digital impressions varied depending on the IOS and scanning sequence used. Primescan had the highest accuracy, while Emerald showed the most deviation in accuracy for single crown preparations.

• 대한치과교정학회지
• /
• 제46권1호
• /
• pp.3-12
• /
• 2016

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the precision of three-dimensional (3D) images acquired using iTero$^{(R)}$(Align Technology Inc., San Jose, CA, USA) and Trios$^{(R)}$(3Shape Dental Systems, Copenhagen, Denmark) digital intraoral scanners, and to evaluate the effects of the severity of tooth irregularities and scanning sequence on precision. Methods: Dental arch models were fabricated with differing degrees of tooth irregularity and divided into 2 groups based on scanning sequence. To assess their precision, images were superimposed and an optimized superimposition algorithm was employed to measure any 3D deviation. The t-test, paired t-test, and one-way ANOVA were performed (p < 0.05) for statistical analysis. Results: The iTero$^{(R)}$ and Trios$^{(R)}$ systems showed no statistically significant difference in precision among models with differing degrees of tooth irregularity. However, there were statistically significant differences in the precision of the 2 scanners when the starting points of scanning were different. The iTero$^{(R)}$ scanner (mean deviation, $29.84{\pm}12.08{\mu}m$) proved to be less precise than the Trios$^{(R)}$ scanner ($22.17{\pm}4.47{\mu}m$). Conclusions: The precision of 3D images differed according to the degree of tooth irregularity, scanning sequence, and scanner type. However, from a clinical standpoint, both scanners were highly accurate regardless of the degree of tooth irregularity.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• 제13권6호
• /
• pp.373-384
• /
• 2021

PURPOSE. This study aimed to compare the marginal and internal fit of 3-unit monolithic zirconia restorations that were designed by using the data obtained with the aid of intraoral and laboratory scanners. MATERIALS AND METHODS. For the fabrication of 3-unit monolithic zirconia restorations using impressions taken from the maxillary master cast, plaster cast was created and scanned in laboratory scanners (InEos X5 and D900L). The main cast was also scanned with different intraoral scanners (Omnicam [OMNI], Primescan [PS], Trios 3 [T3], Trios 4 [T4]) (n = 12 per group). Zirconia fixed partial dentures were virtually designed, produced from presintered block, and subsequently sintered. Marginal and internal discrepancy values (in ㎛) were measured by using silicone replica method under stereomicroscope. Data were statistically analyzed by using 1-way ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis tests (P<.05). RESULTS. In terms of marginal adaptation, the measurements on the canine tooth indicated better performance with intraoral scanners than those in laboratory scanners, but there was no difference among intraoral scanners (P<.05). In the premolar tooth, PS had the lowest marginal (86.9 ± 19.2 ㎛) and axial (92.4 ± 14.8 ㎛), and T4 had the lowest axio-occlusal (89.4 ± 15.6 ㎛) and occlusal (89.1 ± 13.9 ㎛) discrepancy value. In both canine and premolar teeth, the D900L was found to be the most marginally and internally inconsistent scanner. CONCLUSION. Within the limits of the study, marginal and internal discrepancy values were generally lower in intraoral scanners than in laboratory scanners. Marginal discrepancy values of scanners were clinically acceptable (< 120 ㎛), except D900L.

• 대한치과의사협회지
• /
• 제58권11호
• /
• pp.700-712
• /
• 2020

The conventional mouthguard fabrication process consists of elastomeric impression taking and followed gypsum model making is now into intraoral scanning and direct mouthguard 3D printing with an additive manufacturing process. Also, dental professionals can get various diagnostic data collection such as facial scans, cone-beam CT, jaw motion tracking, and intraoral scan data to superimpose them for making virtual patient datasets. To print mouthguards, dental CAD software allows dental professionals to design mouthguards with ease. This article shows how to make 3D printed mouthguard step by step.

• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• 제17권1호
• /
• pp.55-59
• /
• 2017

Digital dentistry has influenced many dental procedures, such as three-dimensional (3D) diagnosis and treatment planning, surgical splints, and prosthetic treatments. Patient-specific protective appliances (PSPAs) prevent dental injury during endotracheal intubation. However, the required laboratory work takes time, and there is the possibility of tooth extraction while obtaining the dental impression. In this technical report, we utilized new digital technology for creating PSPAs, using direct intraoral scanners and 3D printers for dental cast fabrication.

• 대한치과의사협회지
• /
• 제57권7호
• /
• pp.380-391
• /
• 2019

In recent years, with the introduction of various restorative materials, restorations using CAD/CAM equipment have been increasing in the esthetic dentistry. The critical steps in the fabrication of indirect restorations with CAD/CAM equipment are proper cavity preparation and making accurate impressions. The process of tooth preparation for CAD/CAM restoration should include a mechanical understanding of milling. In addition, during tooth preparation, the clinician should be familiar with additional equipment and techniques for obtaining the convenience. In order to obtain an accurate oral scan, the clinician should understand the limitations of the oral scan and be skilled at techniques for obtaining a successful image when making oral scans. This article focused clinical guidelines for the preparation of CAD/CAM restorations and introduced clinical methods for making successful impression of oral scans in narrow and deep tooth cavity areas.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• 제9권3호
• /
• pp.188-194
• /
• 2017

PURPOSE. This study was to evaluate the effect of repeated ultrasonic scaling and surface polishing with intraoral polishing kits on the surface roughness of three different restorative materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A total of 15 identical discs were fabricated with three different materials. The ultrasonic scaling was conducted for 20 seconds on the test surfaces. Subsequently, a multi-step polishing with recommended intraoral polishing kit was performed for 30 seconds. The 3D profiler and scanning electron microscopy were used to investigate surface integrity before scaling (pristine), after scaling, and after surface polishing for each material. Non-parametric Friedman and Wilcoxon signed rank sum tests were employed to statistically evaluate surface roughness changes of the pristine, scaled, and polished specimens. The level of significance was set at 0.05. RESULTS. Surface roughness values before scaling (pristine), after scaling, and polishing of the metal alloys were $3.02{\pm}0.34{\mu}m$, $2.44{\pm}0.72{\mu}m$, and $3.49{\pm}0.72{\mu}m$, respectively. Surface roughness of lithium disilicate increased from $2.35{\pm}1.05{\mu}m$ (pristine) to $28.54{\pm}9.64{\mu}m$ (scaling), and further increased after polishing ($56.66{\pm}9.12{\mu}m$, P<.05). The zirconia showed the most increase in roughness after scaling (from $1.65{\pm}0.42{\mu}m$ to $101.37{\pm}18.75{\mu}m$), while its surface roughness decreased after polishing ($29.57{\pm}18.86{\mu}m$, P<.05). CONCLUSION. Ultrasonic scaling significantly changed the surface integrities of lithium disilicate and zirconia. Surface polishing with multi-step intraoral kit after repeated scaling was only effective for the zirconia, while it was not for lithium disilicate.

• Journal of Korean Dental Science
• /
• 제16권2호
• /
• 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.

• 산업경영시스템학회지
• /
• 제46권3호
• /
• pp.1-6
• /
• 2023

In the realm of dental prosthesis fabrication, obtaining accurate impressions has historically been a challenging and inefficient process, often hindered by hygiene concerns and patient discomfort. Addressing these limitations, Company D recently introduced a cutting-edge solution by harnessing the potential of intraoral scan images to create 3D dental models. However, the complexity of these scan images, encompassing not only teeth and gums but also the palate, tongue, and other structures, posed a new set of challenges. In response, we propose a sophisticated real-time image segmentation algorithm that selectively extracts pertinent data, specifically focusing on teeth and gums, from oral scan images obtained through Company D's oral scanner for 3D model generation. A key challenge we tackled was the detection of the intricate molar regions, common in dental imaging, which we effectively addressed through intelligent data augmentation for enhanced training. By placing significant emphasis on both accuracy and speed, critical factors for real-time intraoral scanning, our proposed algorithm demonstrated exceptional performance, boasting an impressive accuracy rate of 0.91 and an unrivaled FPS of 92.4. Compared to existing algorithms, our solution exhibited superior outcomes when integrated into Company D's oral scanner. This algorithm is scheduled for deployment and commercialization within Company D's intraoral scanner.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• 제14권4호
• /
• pp.236-249
• /
• 2022

PURPOSE. The present study compared the accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The experimental models were divided into six groups depending on the implant location and the scanning span. Digital impressions were captured using the intraoral optical scanner TRIOS (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). Conventional impressions were taken with the monophase impression material based on addition-cured silicones, Honigum-Mono (DMG, Hamburg, Germany). A high-precision laboratory scanner D900 (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) was used to obtain digital data of resin models and stone casts. Surface tessellation language (STL) datasets from scanner were imported into the analysis software Geomagic Qualify 14 (3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA), and scan body deviations were determined through two-dimensional and three-dimensional analyses. Each scan body was measured five times. The Sidak t test was used to analyze the experimental data. RESULTS. Implant position and scanning distance affected the impression accuracy. For a unilateral arch implant and the mandible models with two implants, no significant difference was observed in the accuracy between the digital and conventional implant impressions on scan bodies; however, the corresponding differences for trans-arch implants and mandible with six implants were extremely significant (P<.001). CONCLUSION. For short-span scanning, the accuracy of digital and conventional implant impressions did not differ significantly. For long-span scanning, the precision of digital impressions was significantly inferior to that of the traditional impressions.