Journal of Technologic Dentistry (대한치과기공학회지)

Korean Academy of Dental Technology (대한치과기공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of accuracy of digital data obtained by intra-oral scanner and extra-oral scanner

구강 내 스캐너와 구강 외 스캐너를 사용하여 취득된 스캔 데이터 정확도 비교

  • Lee, Jae-Jun (Department of Dental Laboratory Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Jeong, Il-Do (Department of Dental Laboratory Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Chong-Myung (Department of Dental Laboratory Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Park, Jin-Young (Department of Dental Laboratory Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Ji-Hwan (Department of Dental Laboratory Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Woong-Chul (Department of Dental Laboratory Science and Engineering, College of Health Science, Korea University)
  • 이재준 (고려대학교 대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공) ;
  • 정일도 (고려대학교 대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공) ;
  • 김총명 (고려대학교 대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공) ;
  • 박진영 (고려대학교 대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공) ;
  • 김지환 (고려대학교 대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공) ;
  • 김웅철 (고려대학교 대학원 보건과학과 치의기공전공)
  • Received : 2015.09.07
  • Accepted : 2015.12.18
  • Published : 2015.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the scan data acquired by the extra-oral and intra-oral scanner. Methods: The maxillary right first molar was made of polymethyl methacrylate(PMMA) specimen. This PMMA specimen was scanned with a engineering scanner and intra-oral scanner. Meanwhile, extra-oral scanner scanned stone die duplicated from PMMA master die. Trueness and precision of scan datas was measured by 3-dimensinal inspection. Independent t-test was conduct to analysis the significant difference(a=0.05). Results: In the trueness analysis, mean of discrepancies were 13.82um for intra oral scanner and 16.84 um for extra-oral scanner. In the precision analysis, mean of discrepancies were 11.72 for inta-oral scanner and 9.2 for extra-oral scanner. Both trueness and precision showed a statistically significant difference (Table 1, p<0.05). Conclusion: Intra-oral scanner can show higher trueness than extra-oral scanner, it has lower precision.

Keywords

References

  1. Kim KB, Kim SJ, Kim JH, Kim JH.An evaluation of validity of three dimensional digital model fabricated by dental scannable stone. J Korean Acad Dent Tech, 35(1), 29-35, 2013. https://doi.org/10.14347/kadt.2013.35.1.029
  2. Lee JJ, Park JY, Bae SY, Jeon JH, Kim JH, Kim WC. Evaluation of the model accuracy according to threes types of dental scanner. J Dent Hyg Sci, 15(2), 226-231. 2015. https://doi.org/10.17135/jdhs.2015.15.2.226
  3. Birnbaum NS, Aaronson HB, Stevens C, Cohen B: 3D digital scanners: a high-tech approach to more accurate dental impressions. Inside Dentistry, 5, 70-74, 2009.
  4. Christensen GJ. The challenge to conventional impressions. J Am Dent Assoc, 139(3), 347, 2008. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0165
  5. Christensen GJ. Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital or digital plus in-office milling. J Am Dent Assoc, 140(10), 1301-1304, 2009. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2009.0054
  6. Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent, 109(2), 121-8, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60028-1
  7. Ender A, Mehl. In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence int, 46(1), 9-17, 2015.
  8. Felton, D, Kanoy B, Bayne SA, Wirthman G. Effect of in vivo crown margin discrepancies on periodontal health. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 65(3), 357-364, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(91)90225-L
  9. Jeon JH, Choi BY, KimCM, KimJH, KimHY, KimWC. Three-dimensional evaluation of the repeatability of scanned conventional impressions of prepared teeth generated with white-and blue-light scanners. J Prosthet Dent, In Press, 2015.
  10. Kim JH, KimKB, KimWC, KimJH, KimHY, Accuracy and precision of polyurethane dental arch models fabricated using a threedimensional subtractive rapid prototyping method with an intraoral scanning technique. Korean J Orthod, 44(2), 69-76, 2014. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2014.44.2.69
  11. May KB, RussellMM, RazzoogME, LangBR. Precision of fit: the Procera AllCeram crown. J Prosthet Dent, 80(4), 394-404, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70002-2
  12. Meng Z, Yao H, Liang Y, Li Y, Lan S, Wang G. Measurement of the refractive index of human teeth by optical coherence tomography. J Biomed Opt, 14, 034010-034010-034014, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.3130322
  13. Nedelcu RG, Persson AS. Scanning accuracy and precision in 4 intraoral scanners: An in vitro comparison based on 3-dimensional analysis. J Prosthet Dent, 112, 1461-71, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.05.027
  14. Park JY, Kim HY, Kim JH, Kim JH, Kim WC. Comparison of prosthetic models produced by traditional and additive manufacturing methods, J Adv Prosthodont 7(4), 294-302, 2015. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2015.7.4.294
  15. Patzelt SB, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S, Strub JR, Att W. Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clin oral investing, 1-8, 2013.
  16. Perakis N, Belser UC, Magne P. Final impressions: a review of material properties and description of a current technique. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 24, 109-18, 2004.
  17. Persson A, Andersson M, Oden A, Sandborgh-Englund G. A three-dimensional evaluation of a laser scanner and a touch-probe scanner. J Prosthet Dent, 95, 194-200, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.01.003
  18. Persson AS, Oden A, Andersson M, Sandborgh-Englund G. Digitization of simulated clinical dental impressions: virtualthree-dimensional analysis of exactness. Dent Mater, 25, 929-936, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.01.100
  19. International Organization for Standardization. ISO-12836(2015) Dentistry-Digitizing devices for CAD/CAM systems for indirect dental restorations-Test methods for assessing accuracy. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2012.
  20. American Dental Association. Council on dental materals, ANSI/ADA specification No. 25 for Dental Gypsum Products. American Dental Association, Chicago, 640-644, 1987.

Cited by

  1. 복합레진으로 제작한 인레이 보철물 구조에 따른 교합면 부위의 2차원 변연 적합도 및 내면 부위의 3차원 정확성 분석 vol.41, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.14347/kadt.2019.41.1.21
  2. 유리섬유 보강재를 삽입한 하악 레진의치 인상면의 정밀성 평가 vol.42, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.14347/kadt.2020.42.1.27
  3. 교합면의 교모형태에 따른 치과용 모형 스캐너의 정확도 평가 vol.42, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.14347/jtd.2020.42.4.313