Journal article
Accuracy of a Digital Impression System Based on Active Triangulation Technology With Blue Light for Implants: Effect of Clinically Relevant Parameters.
- Giménez B *Research Fellow, Department of Buccofacial Prosthesis, Faculty of Odontology, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain. †Professor and Head, Dental Material Unit, Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Materials Science, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. ‡Associate Professor, Department of Buccofacial Prosthesis, Faculty of Odontology, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain. ¶Professor and Chair, Department of Buccofacial Prosthesis, Faculty of Odontology, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
- Özcan M
- Martínez-Rus F
- Pradíes G
- 2015-06-10
Published in:
- Implant dentistry. - 2015
Computer-Aided Design
Dental Implants
Dental Impression Technique
Dental Prosthesis Design
Humans
Reproducibility of Results
English
PURPOSE
To evaluate the accuracy of a digital impression system considering clinical parameters.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A master model with 6 implants (27, 25, 22, 12, 15, and 17) was fitted with polyether ether ketone scan bodies. Implant no. 25 was placed with 30° mesial angulation and no. 15 with 30° distal angulation in relation to the vertical plane (y axis). Implant no. 22 was placed at 2 mm and no. 12 placed 4 mm below the gingiva. Experienced (n = 2) and inexperienced (n = 2) operators performed the scanning (CEREC system). Measurements involved 5 distances (27-25, 27-22, 27-12, 27-15, 27-17). Measurements with coordinated measuring machine of the master model acted as the true values.
RESULTS
The experience of the operator affected the accuracy. Operator 3 (inexperienced) performed better than the rest. Angulation and implant depth did not affect the accuracy results. The position of the camera affected the accuracy of the system. The first scanned quadrant had significantly smaller error, -17 ± 26.3 μm, than the second quadrant, -116 ± 103 μm.
CONCLUSIONS
Digital impressions with CEREC Bluecam system can be a feasible alternative for challenging cases where angulation and depth of the implants are present. The accuracy of the CEREC system for the first scanned quadrant is high, and it decreases when completing a full arch.
To evaluate the accuracy of a digital impression system considering clinical parameters.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A master model with 6 implants (27, 25, 22, 12, 15, and 17) was fitted with polyether ether ketone scan bodies. Implant no. 25 was placed with 30° mesial angulation and no. 15 with 30° distal angulation in relation to the vertical plane (y axis). Implant no. 22 was placed at 2 mm and no. 12 placed 4 mm below the gingiva. Experienced (n = 2) and inexperienced (n = 2) operators performed the scanning (CEREC system). Measurements involved 5 distances (27-25, 27-22, 27-12, 27-15, 27-17). Measurements with coordinated measuring machine of the master model acted as the true values.
RESULTS
The experience of the operator affected the accuracy. Operator 3 (inexperienced) performed better than the rest. Angulation and implant depth did not affect the accuracy results. The position of the camera affected the accuracy of the system. The first scanned quadrant had significantly smaller error, -17 ± 26.3 μm, than the second quadrant, -116 ± 103 μm.
CONCLUSIONS
Digital impressions with CEREC Bluecam system can be a feasible alternative for challenging cases where angulation and depth of the implants are present. The accuracy of the CEREC system for the first scanned quadrant is high, and it decreases when completing a full arch.
- Language
-
- English
- Open access status
- closed
- Identifiers
-
- DOI 10.1097/ID.0000000000000283
- PMID 26057777
- Persistent URL
- https://sonar.ch/global/documents/252153
Statistics
Document views: 21
File downloads: