Accuracy of single-abutment digital cast obtained using intraoral and cast scanners

Abstract Statement of problem Scanners are frequently used in the fabrication of dental prostheses. However, the accuracy of these scanners is variable, and little information is available. Purpose The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of cast scanners with that of intraoral...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of prosthetic dentistry 2017-02, Vol.117 (2), p.253-259
Main Authors: Lee, Jae-Jun, MSc, Jeong, II-Do, PhD, Park, Jin-Young, PhD, Jeon, Jin-Hun, MSc, PhD, Kim, Ji-Hwan, MPH, PhD, Kim, Woong-Chul, MPH, PhD
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Computer-Aided Design
Dental Abutments
Dental Casting Technique
Dental Impression Technique
Dental Prosthesis Design
Dentistry
Humans
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
Imaging, Three-Dimensional
In Vitro Techniques
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Statement of problem Scanners are frequently used in the fabrication of dental prostheses. However, the accuracy of these scanners is variable, and little information is available. Purpose The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of cast scanners with that of intraoral scanners by using different image impression techniques. Material and methods A poly(methyl methacrylate) master model was fabricated to replicate a maxillary first molar single-abutment tooth model. The master model was scanned with an accurate engineering scanner to obtain a true value (n=1) and with 2 intraoral scanners (CEREC Bluecam and CEREC Omnicam; n=6 each). The cast scanner scanned the master model and duplicated the dental stone cast from the master model (n=6). The trueness and precision of the data were measured using a 3-dimensional analysis program. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the different sets of scanning data, followed by a post hoc Mann-Whitney U test with a significance level modified by Bonferroni correction (α/6=.0083). The type 1 error level (α) was set at .05. Results The trueness value (root mean square: mean ±standard deviation) was 17.5 ±1.8 μm for the Bluecam, 13.8 ±1.4 μm for the Omnicam, 17.4 ±1.7 μm for cast scanner 1, and 12.3 ±0.1 μm for cast scanner 2. The differences between the Bluecam and the cast scanner 1 and between the Omnicam and the cast scanner 2 were not statistically significant ( P >.0083), but a statistically significant difference was found between all the other pairs ( P .0083), but there was a statistically significant difference between all the other pairs ( P
ISSN:0022-3913
1097-6841
DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.07.021