Dimensional accuracy of jaw scans performed on alginate impressions or stone models

Vogel, A; Kılıç, Fatih; Schmidt, Falko; Rübel, Sebastian; Lapatki, Bernd G.

doi:10.1007/s00056-015-0296-2

Cited by 19 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results appear to be partially supported by previous findings: Santoro et al 16) measured a plaster model by hand using a digital caliper, and compared this to a digital model generated from an alginate impression using OrthoCAD (Cadent, Fairview, NJ, USA). His study reported that all tooth-size measurements from the digital model were smaller compared to the plaster model, which may be due to shrinkage of impression, expansion of gypsum 4) , or distorted digital data. Flügge et al 7) compared intraoral and extraoral scanning using the same scanner (iTero, Align Technologies, San Jose, CA, USA), and reported that intraoral scanning was less accurate than extraoral scanning.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Digital three-dimensional (3D) models are created by scanning impression and plaster models using desktop scanners, or otherwise by cone-beam computed tomography. These methods have been widely accepted in clinical orthodontics, and are advantageous due to the compact storage space, their potential to expand applications for treatment planning, and their easy customization 4,5) . The use of commercial intraoral scanners to capture information on dental arches has increased in recent years, and is an attractive method for orthodontist.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accuracy of digital models generated by conventional impression/plaster-model methods and intraoral scanning

Tomita

Uechi²,

Konno

et al. 2018

Dental Materials Journal

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We compared the accuracy of digital models generated by desktop-scanning of conventional impression/plaster models versus intraoral scanning. Eight ceramic spheres were attached to the buccal molar regions of dental epoxy models, and reference linear-distance measurement were determined using a contact-type coordinate measuring instrument. Alginate (AI group) and silicone (SI group) impressions were taken and converted into cast models using dental stone; the models were scanned using desktop scanner. As an alternative, intraoral scans were taken using an intraoral scanner, and digital models were generated from these scans (IOS group). Twelve linear-distance measurement combinations were calculated between different sphere-centers for all digital models. There were no significant differences among the three groups using total of six linear-distance measurements. When limited to five lineardistance measurement, the IOS group showed significantly higher accuracy compared to the AI and SI groups. Intraoral scans may be more accurate compared to scans of conventional impression/plaster models.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of digital models generated by conventional impression/plaster-model methods and intraoral scanning

Tomita

Uechi²,

Konno

et al. 2018

Dental Materials Journal

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although this is not the topic of the study, it is at least obligatory to mention them briefly. Alginates can be used primarily to take impressions even in contact with other structures such as bone structures, both in the maxillofacial region and in other regions in orthopedics [22]. This material must be completely removed because it can go against an inflammatory reaction from the tissues [23].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alginate Materials and Dental Impression Technique: A Current State of the Art and Application to Dental Practice

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hydrocolloids were the first elastic materials to be used in the dental field. Elastic impression materials include reversible (agar-agar), irreversible (alginate) hydrocolloids and synthetic elastomers (polysulfides, polyethers, silicones). They reproduce an imprint faithfully, providing details of a high definition despite the presence of undercuts. With the removal of the impression, being particularly rich in water, the imprints can deform but later adapt to the original shape due to the elastic properties they possess. The advantages of using alginate include the low cost, a better tolerability on the part of the patient, the ease of manipulation, the short time needed for execution, the instrumentation and the very simple execution technique and possibility of detecting a detailed impression (even in the presence of undercuts) in a single step. A comprehensive review of the current literature was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines by accessing the NCBI PubMed database. Authors conducted a search of articles in written in English published from 2008 to 2018. All the relevant studies were included in the search with respect to the characteristics and evolution of new marine derived materials. Much progress has been made in the search for new marine derived materials. Conventional impression materials are different, and especially with the advent of digital technology, they have been suffering from a decline in research attention over the last few years. However, this type of impression material, alginates (derived from marine algae), have the advantage of being among the most used in the dental medical field.

show abstract

“…With optical scanners, it is possible to create digital models by directly scanning the patient's teeth or indirectly scanning the cast or impression. [7][8][9][10] Digital casts allow prosthodontists to perform diagnosis, treatment planning, and fabrication of the final restoration virtually by computer aided appliance manufacturing. 11,12 Also, they allow digital casts to completely replace conventional casts in case when a physical representation of the cast is needed for legal purposes or prosthesis design.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the Accuracy of Three-Dimensional Printed Casts, Digital, and Conventional Casts: An In Vitro Study

Aly

Mohsen

2020

Eur J Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The integration of computer-aided design and manufacturing technologies in diagnosis, treatment planning, and fabrication of prosthetic restoration is changing the way in which prosthodontic treatment is provided to patients. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) printed casts produced from the intraoral scanner using stereolithographic (SLA) 3D printing technique, their digital replicas, and conventional stone casts. Materials and Methods In this in vitro study, a typodont of maxillary and mandibular arches with full dentate ivory teeth was used as a reference cast. The typodont was digitized using Trios 3Shape intraoral scanner to create digital casts. The digital files were converted into 3D printed physical casts using a prototyping machine that utilizes the stereolithography printing technology and photocurable polymer as printing material. Linear measurements (mesiodistal and occlusocervical) and interarch measurements (intercanine and intermolar) were made for digital and prototyped models and were compared with the original stone casts. The reference teeth were canines, first premolars and second premolars in the maxillary and mandibular arches on the right and left sides. The measurements on printed and conventional casts were done by digital caliper while on digital casts; Geomagic Qualify software was used. Statistical Analysis One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare measurements among groups. Results Digital casts showed significantly higher error than the other two groups in all linear and interarch measurements. The mean errors of the digital cast in occlusocervical (OC) and mesiodistal (MD) measurements (0.016 and 0.006, respectively) were higher compared with those in the other two groups (OC, 0.004 and 0.007 and MD, 0.003 and 0.005 [p < 0.0001 and p = 0.02, respectively]). Also, digital mean error in intermolar width (IMW) and intercanine width (ICW) (0.142 and 0.113, respectively) were greater than the other two groups (IMW, 0.019 and 0.008 and ICW, 0.021 and 0.011 [p < 0.0001]). However, the errors were within the acceptable clinical range. Conclusion The 3D printed casts may be considered as a substitute for stone casts with clinically acceptable accuracy that can be used in diagnosis, treatment planning, and fabrication of prosthetic restorations.

show abstract

Dimensional accuracy of jaw scans performed on alginate impressions or stone models

Cited by 19 publications

References 31 publications

Accuracy of digital models generated by conventional impression/plaster-model methods and intraoral scanning

Accuracy of digital models generated by conventional impression/plaster-model methods and intraoral scanning

Alginate Materials and Dental Impression Technique: A Current State of the Art and Application to Dental Practice

Comparison of the Accuracy of Three-Dimensional Printed Casts, Digital, and Conventional Casts: An In Vitro Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About