View in EDS

Accuracy of implant abutment level digital impressions using stereophotogrammetry in edentulous jaws: an in vitro pilot study.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Accuracy of implant abutment level digital impressions using stereophotogrammetry in edentulous jaws: an in vitro pilot study.
Authors: Zhou, Yuan, You, Lang, Fan, Zhen
Source: BMC Oral Health; 10/1/2024, Vol. 24 Issue 1, p1-9, 9p
Subject Terms: DENTAL implants, JAW diseases, IN vitro studies, DENTAL abutments, DENTAL impressions, COMPUTER-aided design, RESEARCH funding, DATA analysis, THREE-dimensional imaging, RESEARCH evaluation, PILOT projects, DENTAL casting, DESCRIPTIVE statistics, STATISTICS, PHOTOGRAMMETRY, DATA analysis software
Abstract: Background: In edentulous jaws, factors such as the number of implants, cross-arch distribution, and the angle among implants may affect the accuracy of the implant impression. This study explored factors influencing the accuracy of implant abutment-level digital impressions using stereophotogrammetry in edentulous jaws. Methods: Two standard all-on-4 and all-on-6 models of edentulous jaws were constructed in vitro. In the stereophotogrammetry group (PG), the implant digital impression was made using stereophotogrammetry and saved as an STL file. In the conventional group (CNV), the impression was made using the open-tray splint impression technique. An electronic and optical 3D measuring instrument was used to scan the standard model and the conventional plaster model to obtain STL files. Using 3D data processing software (GOM Inspect Pro, Zeiss), the distance and angle between the abutments in the CNV impression and the PG impression were measured and compared with the data from the standard model. Results: The distance deviation in the PG and the CNV was 145 ± 196 μm and 96 ± 150 μm, respectively, with a significant difference (P < 0.001). The angle deviation in the PG and the CNV was 0.82 ± 0.88° and 0.74 ± 0.62°, respectively, with no significant difference (P = 0.267). In the PG, the distance deviation was negatively correlated with the distance between implants (r = -0.145, P = 0.028) and positively correlated with the angle of implants (r = 0.205, P = 0.002). The angle deviation was negatively correlated with the distance between implants (r = -0.198, P = 0.003) and positively correlated with the angle of implants (r = 0.172, P = 0.009). In the CNV, the effect of inter-implant distance on impression accuracy was also shown by Spearman correlation analysis: r = 0.347 (P < 0.001) for distance deviation and r = -0.012 (P = 0.859) for angle deviation. The effect of inter-implant angulation on impression accuracy deviation was r = -0.026 (P = 0.698) for distance deviation and r = 0.056 (P = 0.399) for angle deviation. Conclusions: The CNV method is closer to the real value of the original model. The distance between implants and the distribution angle had a weak correlation with the accuracy of digital impressions but no significant correlation with the accuracy of traditional impressions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of BMC Oral Health is the property of BioMed Central and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Complementary Index
Description
Abstract:Background: In edentulous jaws, factors such as the number of implants, cross-arch distribution, and the angle among implants may affect the accuracy of the implant impression. This study explored factors influencing the accuracy of implant abutment-level digital impressions using stereophotogrammetry in edentulous jaws. Methods: Two standard all-on-4 and all-on-6 models of edentulous jaws were constructed in vitro. In the stereophotogrammetry group (PG), the implant digital impression was made using stereophotogrammetry and saved as an STL file. In the conventional group (CNV), the impression was made using the open-tray splint impression technique. An electronic and optical 3D measuring instrument was used to scan the standard model and the conventional plaster model to obtain STL files. Using 3D data processing software (GOM Inspect Pro, Zeiss), the distance and angle between the abutments in the CNV impression and the PG impression were measured and compared with the data from the standard model. Results: The distance deviation in the PG and the CNV was 145 ± 196 μm and 96 ± 150 μm, respectively, with a significant difference (P < 0.001). The angle deviation in the PG and the CNV was 0.82 ± 0.88° and 0.74 ± 0.62°, respectively, with no significant difference (P = 0.267). In the PG, the distance deviation was negatively correlated with the distance between implants (r = -0.145, P = 0.028) and positively correlated with the angle of implants (r = 0.205, P = 0.002). The angle deviation was negatively correlated with the distance between implants (r = -0.198, P = 0.003) and positively correlated with the angle of implants (r = 0.172, P = 0.009). In the CNV, the effect of inter-implant distance on impression accuracy was also shown by Spearman correlation analysis: r = 0.347 (P < 0.001) for distance deviation and r = -0.012 (P = 0.859) for angle deviation. The effect of inter-implant angulation on impression accuracy deviation was r = -0.026 (P = 0.698) for distance deviation and r = 0.056 (P = 0.399) for angle deviation. Conclusions: The CNV method is closer to the real value of the original model. The distance between implants and the distribution angle had a weak correlation with the accuracy of digital impressions but no significant correlation with the accuracy of traditional impressions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:14726831
DOI:10.1186/s12903-024-04888-1