Journal of Korean society of Dental Hygiene (한국치위생학회지)

Korean Society of Dental Hygiene (한국치위생학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of the accuracy of digital models made from white light scanner by scanning method

스캐닝 방법에 따른 백색광 스캐너 기반으로 채득된 디지털 모형의 정확성 비교

  • Kim, Ki-Baek (Department of health science specialized in Dental Lab. Science & Engineering, Graduate school, Korea University) ;
  • Lee, Gyeong-Tak (Department of health science specialized in Dental Lab. Science & Engineering, Graduate school, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Jae-Hong (Department of health science specialized in Dental Lab. Science & Engineering, Graduate school, Korea University)
  • 김기백 (고려대학교 일반대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공) ;
  • 이경탁 (고려대학교 일반대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공) ;
  • 김재홍 (고려대학교 일반대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공)
  • Received : 2012.08.13
  • Accepted : 2012.12.10
  • Published : 2012.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives : The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of digitized stone models, impression materials compared to the master model and the reliability of the computer aided analysis. Methods : A master model(500B-1, Nissin dental product, Japan) with the prepared lower full arch tooth was used. Ten vinyl polysiloxane impressions(Examix$^{(R)}$, GC Industrial Corp, Japan) of master model were taken and type IV stone(aesthetic-base gold$^{(R)}$, Dentona, Germany) were poured in stone models. The linear distance between the reference points were measured and analyzed on the Delcam Copycad$^{(R)}$(Delcam plc, UK). The t-student test for paired samples was used for statistical analysis. Results : The mean differences to master model for stone model and impression material were 0.11~0.19mm, and 0.19~0.29mm, respectively. There were statistical differences in dimensional accuracy for full arch impression between master model and stone model/impressions(p<.05). Conclusions : Two different scanning methods showed clinically acceptable accuracy of full arch digital impression produced by them. These results will have to be confirmed in further clinical studies.

Keywords

References

  1. Tinschert J, Natt G, Mautsch W, Spikermann H, Anusavice KJ. Marginal fit of alumina-and zirconia-based fixed partial dentures produced by a CAD/CAM system. Oper Dent 2001;26(4):367-374.
  2. Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y. A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J 2009;28(1):44-56. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.28.44
  3. Christensen GJ. Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital or digital plus in-office milling. J Am Dent Assoc 2009;140(10):1301-1304. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2009.0054
  4. Rekow ED. High-technology innovations and limitations for restorative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am 1993;37(3):513-524.
  5. Christensen GJ. The state of fixed prosthodontics impressions: room for improvement. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;136(3):343-346.
  6. Finger W, Ohsawa M. Effect of mixing ratio on properties of elastomeric dental impression materials. Dent Mater 1986;2(4):183-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(86)80033-1
  7. Shigeto N, Murata H, Hamada T. Evaluation of the methods for dislodging the impression tray affecting the dimensional accuracy of the abutments in complete dental arch cast. J Prothet Dent 1989;61(1):54-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90109-1
  8. Gerrow JD, Schneider RL. A comparison of the compatibility of elastomeric impression materials, type IV dental stones, and liquid media. J Prothet Dent 1987;57(3):292-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(87)90300-3
  9. Ciesco JN, Malone WF, Sandrik JL, Mazur B. Comparison of elastomeric impression materials used in fixed prosthodontics J Prothet Dent 1981;45(1):89-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(81)90018-4
  10. American Dental Association. Council on dental materals, ANSI/ADA specification No. 25 for Dental Gypsum Products. Chicago:Am Dent Assoc; 1987:640-644.
  11. Millstein PL. Determining the accuracy of gypsum casts made from type IV dental stone. J Oral Rehabil 1992;19(3):239-243. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1992.tb01098.x
  12. Custer F, Updegrove L, Ward M. Accuracy and dimensional stability of a silicone rubber base impression material. J Prothet Dent 1964;14(6): 1115-1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(64)90181-7
  13. Persson AS, Oden A, Andersson M, Sandborgh- Englund G. Digitization of simulated clinical dental impressions: Virtual three-dimensional analysis of exactness. Dent mater 2009;25(7): 929-936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.01.100
  14. Quaas S, Rudolph H, Luthardt RG. Direct mechanical data acquisition of dental impressions for the manufacturing of CAD/CAM restorations. J Dent 2007;35(12):903-908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2007.08.008
  15. Creed B, Chung HK, Jeryl DE, James JX, Lee A. Comparison of the accuracy of linear measurement obtained from cone beam computerized tomography images and digital models. Semin Orthod 2011;17(2): 49-56. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2010.08.010
  16. Delong R, Heinzen M, Hodges JS, Ko CC, Douglas WH. Accuracy of a system for creating 3D computer models of dental arches. J Dent Res 2003;82(6):438-442. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910308200607
  17. May KB, Russell MM, Razzoog ME, Lang BR. Precision of fit: the Procera AllCeram crown. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80(4):394-404. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70002-2
  18. Mehl A, Gloger W, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R. A new optical 3D device for the detection of wear. J Dent Res 1997;76(11):1799-1807. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345970760111201
  19. Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. Br Dent J 2008;204(9):505-511. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2008.350
  20. Kuroda T, Motohashi N, Tominaga R, Iwata K. Three-dimensional dental cast analyzing system using laser scanning. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996;110(4):365-369. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(96)70036-7
  21. Motohashi N, Kuroda T. A 3D computer-aided design system applied to diagnosis and treatment planning in orthodontics and orthognathic surgery. Eur J Orthod 1999;21(3):263-274. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/21.3.263
  22. Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M, Nicolay OF, Cangialosi TJ. Comparison of measurements made on digital and plster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124(1):101-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00152-5
  23. Zilberman O, Huggare JA, Parikakis KA. Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three - dimensional virtual orthodontic models. Angle Orthod 2003;73(3):301-306.
  24. Stevens DR, Flores-Mir C, Nebbe B, et al. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129(6):794-803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.08.023
  25. Quimby ML, Vig KW, Rashid RG, Firestone AR. The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. Angle Orthod 2004;74(3):298-303.

Cited by

  1. Evaluation of validity of three dimensional dental digital model made from blue LED dental scanner vol.15, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2014.15.5.3007