Accuracy of Four Intra-Oral Scanners in Subgingival Vertical Preparation: An In Vitro 3-Dimensional Comparative Analysis
One of the most critical aspects in intraoral impression is the detection of the finish line, particularly in the case of subgingival preparations. The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy among four different Intra Oral Scanners (IOSs) in scanning a subgingival vertical margins p...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-10-01
|
| Series: | Materials |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/16/19/6553 |
| _version_ | 1797575618250932224 |
|---|---|
| author | Alessio Casucci Giulia Verniani Ralph Habib Nicolò Maria Ricci Clelia Carboncini Marco Ferrari |
| author_facet | Alessio Casucci Giulia Verniani Ralph Habib Nicolò Maria Ricci Clelia Carboncini Marco Ferrari |
| author_sort | Alessio Casucci |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | One of the most critical aspects in intraoral impression is the detection of the finish line, particularly in the case of subgingival preparations. The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy among four different Intra Oral Scanners (IOSs) in scanning a subgingival vertical margins preparation (VP). A reference maxillary typodont (MT) was fabricated with a VP for full crown on #16 and #21. The MT was scanned with a laboratory scanner (Aadva lab scanner, GC, Tokyo, Japan) to obtain a digital MT (dMT) in .stl format file. A group of 40 digital casts (dIOC) were obtained by scanning the MT 10 times with four different IOSs: Trios 3, 3Shape A/S; I700, Medit; Vivascan, Ivoclar; and Experimental IOS, GC. All the obtained dIOCs were imported into an inspection software program (Geomagic Control X; 3D SYSTEMS) to be superimposed to the dMT in order to calculate trueness. Therefore, in order to calculate precision, all the scans of the same scanner group were superimposed onto the cast that obtained the best result of trueness. The results were collected as the root mean square value (RMS) on the #16 and #21 abutment surfaces and on a marginal area positioned 1 mm above and below the gingival margin. A nonparametric analysis Kruskal–Wallis test was performed to compare the RMS values obtained in the different iOS groups for trueness and precision. Statistical significance was set at 0.05. For the trueness on the #16 abutment, the Vivascan reported statistically lower values, while on the #21 abutment, Vivascan (56.0 ± 12.1) and Experimental IOS, GC (59.2 ± 2.7) performed statistically better than the others. Regarding precision, Experimental IOS, GC were significantly better than the others on #16 (10.7 ± 2.1) and in the #21 area Experimental, GC, and Trios 3 performed statistically better(16.9 ± 13.8; 18.0 ± 2.7). At the subgingival marginal level for both #16 and #21, all the IOS reported reduced accuracy compared to clinical acceptance. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T21:40:56Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-973464516e1546939c3a1c8999d53c63 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1996-1944 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T21:40:56Z |
| publishDate | 2023-10-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Materials |
| spelling | doaj.art-973464516e1546939c3a1c8999d53c632023-11-19T14:41:28ZengMDPI AGMaterials1996-19442023-10-011619655310.3390/ma16196553Accuracy of Four Intra-Oral Scanners in Subgingival Vertical Preparation: An In Vitro 3-Dimensional Comparative AnalysisAlessio Casucci0Giulia Verniani1Ralph Habib2Nicolò Maria Ricci3Clelia Carboncini4Marco Ferrari5Department of Prosthodontics, University of Siena, 53100 Siena, ItalyDepartment of Prosthodontics, University of Siena, 53100 Siena, ItalyDepartment of Prosthodontics, University of Siena, 53100 Siena, ItalyDepartment of Prosthodontics, University of Siena, 53100 Siena, ItalyDepartment of Periodontics, University of Turin, 10126 Turin, ItalyDepartment of Prosthodontics, University of Siena, 53100 Siena, ItalyOne of the most critical aspects in intraoral impression is the detection of the finish line, particularly in the case of subgingival preparations. The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy among four different Intra Oral Scanners (IOSs) in scanning a subgingival vertical margins preparation (VP). A reference maxillary typodont (MT) was fabricated with a VP for full crown on #16 and #21. The MT was scanned with a laboratory scanner (Aadva lab scanner, GC, Tokyo, Japan) to obtain a digital MT (dMT) in .stl format file. A group of 40 digital casts (dIOC) were obtained by scanning the MT 10 times with four different IOSs: Trios 3, 3Shape A/S; I700, Medit; Vivascan, Ivoclar; and Experimental IOS, GC. All the obtained dIOCs were imported into an inspection software program (Geomagic Control X; 3D SYSTEMS) to be superimposed to the dMT in order to calculate trueness. Therefore, in order to calculate precision, all the scans of the same scanner group were superimposed onto the cast that obtained the best result of trueness. The results were collected as the root mean square value (RMS) on the #16 and #21 abutment surfaces and on a marginal area positioned 1 mm above and below the gingival margin. A nonparametric analysis Kruskal–Wallis test was performed to compare the RMS values obtained in the different iOS groups for trueness and precision. Statistical significance was set at 0.05. For the trueness on the #16 abutment, the Vivascan reported statistically lower values, while on the #21 abutment, Vivascan (56.0 ± 12.1) and Experimental IOS, GC (59.2 ± 2.7) performed statistically better than the others. Regarding precision, Experimental IOS, GC were significantly better than the others on #16 (10.7 ± 2.1) and in the #21 area Experimental, GC, and Trios 3 performed statistically better(16.9 ± 13.8; 18.0 ± 2.7). At the subgingival marginal level for both #16 and #21, all the IOS reported reduced accuracy compared to clinical acceptance.https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/16/19/6553intraoral scannerssubgingival preparationvertical preparationaccuracydigital impression |
| spellingShingle | Alessio Casucci Giulia Verniani Ralph Habib Nicolò Maria Ricci Clelia Carboncini Marco Ferrari Accuracy of Four Intra-Oral Scanners in Subgingival Vertical Preparation: An In Vitro 3-Dimensional Comparative Analysis Materials intraoral scanners subgingival preparation vertical preparation accuracy digital impression |
| title | Accuracy of Four Intra-Oral Scanners in Subgingival Vertical Preparation: An In Vitro 3-Dimensional Comparative Analysis |
| title_full | Accuracy of Four Intra-Oral Scanners in Subgingival Vertical Preparation: An In Vitro 3-Dimensional Comparative Analysis |
| title_fullStr | Accuracy of Four Intra-Oral Scanners in Subgingival Vertical Preparation: An In Vitro 3-Dimensional Comparative Analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Accuracy of Four Intra-Oral Scanners in Subgingival Vertical Preparation: An In Vitro 3-Dimensional Comparative Analysis |
| title_short | Accuracy of Four Intra-Oral Scanners in Subgingival Vertical Preparation: An In Vitro 3-Dimensional Comparative Analysis |
| title_sort | accuracy of four intra oral scanners in subgingival vertical preparation an in vitro 3 dimensional comparative analysis |
| topic | intraoral scanners subgingival preparation vertical preparation accuracy digital impression |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/16/19/6553 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT alessiocasucci accuracyoffourintraoralscannersinsubgingivalverticalpreparationaninvitro3dimensionalcomparativeanalysis AT giuliaverniani accuracyoffourintraoralscannersinsubgingivalverticalpreparationaninvitro3dimensionalcomparativeanalysis AT ralphhabib accuracyoffourintraoralscannersinsubgingivalverticalpreparationaninvitro3dimensionalcomparativeanalysis AT nicolomariaricci accuracyoffourintraoralscannersinsubgingivalverticalpreparationaninvitro3dimensionalcomparativeanalysis AT cleliacarboncini accuracyoffourintraoralscannersinsubgingivalverticalpreparationaninvitro3dimensionalcomparativeanalysis AT marcoferrari accuracyoffourintraoralscannersinsubgingivalverticalpreparationaninvitro3dimensionalcomparativeanalysis |