RESUMEN

PURPOSE: This in vitro study was conducted to investigate the accuracy of intraoral scanner (IOS) for recording maximal intercuspal position (MIP) and border positions of the mandible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Maxillary and mandibular master casts were articulated in MIP, protrusive, and lateral interocclusal position sequentially on a semi-adjustable articulator. For each articulation relation, sites of occlusal contacts (SOCs) and sites of clearance (SCs) were identified on the master casts with articulating paper (reference sites). IOS was used to take full arch scans and nine virtual interocclusal records (VIRs) for virtual articulation of models. Virtual SOCs and SCs were detected with 3D processing software and compared to those identified with the articulating paper. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for each articulation relation. RESULTS: For MIP, IOS showed adequate sensitivity and NPV of 100%, and specificity and a PPV of 99%. For protrusive position, the IOS showed a sensitivity and a NPV of 100%, a high PPV of 86%, and a specificity of 83%. For lateral positions, the specificity and the PPV were high (93% and 79%, respectively), but the sensitivity and the NPV were below the clinically acceptable limits (28% and 56%, respectively). CONCLUSION: IOS displayed clinically acceptable accuracy for recording MIP and protrusive border mandibular position. However, IOS had less accuracy for lateral border mandibular position.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: This pilot clinical trial aimed to investigate accuracy of intra-oral scanning (IOS) with and without artificial reference markers in capturing total, subtotal and congenital nasal defects. BASIC PROCEDURES: Thirteen patients with 3 types of nasal defects were selected and digitally scanned using an IOS with (ScM) and without artificial markers (Sc). Patients were grouped as follows; Group T (total nasal defect), Group P (partial/subtotal nasal defect), Group C (congenital defect). Silicone impressions of the defects were made and poured to get a model that was scanned using a Desktop scanner (Imp). The standard tessellation language (STL) files obtained from IOS were registered and compared to each other using a processing software. RMS, positive and negative average values were used to report deviations between the scans. Kruskal Wallis test was used to study the effect of defect type, while Friedmann was used to study the effect of impression technique. Results were considered significant at P≤.05. MAIN FINDINGS: All deviation values showed statistically significant differences among the 3 studied nasal defects and among the 3 investigated impression techniques. The smallest deviation values were recorded in Sc-ScM of congenital defects (RMS= 0.13±0.04, +average=0.08±0.01, -average=-0.09±0.02), while the largest deviation values were recorded in IMP-Sc in the total defects (RMS= 0.38±0.05, +average=0.29±0.04, -average=-0.29±0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, it was concluded that the nasal defect type and the use of artificial markers during scanning affect the deviation parameters of the obtained scan. The combined effect of the studied parameters calls for the use of markers in when scanning total nasal defects.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the effect of the "cut-out rescan" strategy on the accuracy of intraoral digital scans from 25° convergent implants positioned at two distinct depths. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two customized models were fabricated, each designated to receive two posterior converged implant fixtures: one at a depth of 1 mm and the other at a depth of 4 mm. Initially, the models were scanned as reference casts using a lab scanner. The test group was involved in scanning the 1-mm and 4-mm implant models using an intraoral scanner in the following order: (1) scanning the 1-mm (T1; n = 10) and (2) 4-mm (T4; n = 10) implant groups with scan bodies connected to both fixtures in each model; (3) cut-out rescan (COR) in the 1-mm (COR1; n = 10) and (4) 4-mm (COR4; n = 10) models, leading to 40 digital files in standard tessellation language format. The mean absolute deviation (MAD), in terms of trueness and precision, between the experimental and control scans was assessed through the alignment of their respective datasets using three-dimensional analysis software. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Levene's tests were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: The COR4 group exhibited the highest MAD, indicative of both trueness and precision (Mean ±SD: 55.659 ±34.802). In contrast, the T1 group demonstrated the lowest MAD (Mean ±SD: 43.225 ±19.237). However, the ANOVA analysis showed no significant influence of depth (P = 0.506) or type of scan (P = 0.442) on the MAD. Precision also did not differ significantly across groups (P = 0.071). CONCLUSIONS: The cut-out rescan approach demonstrated an accuracy comparable to that of the one-time scan method. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Digital intraoral scanning provides clinicians with a range of tools to navigate challenging conditions in which conventional methods may prove difficult, such as cases involving angled adjacent implants. In these scenarios, the cut-out rescan tool serves as a valuable resource, aiding clinicians in overcoming the challenges associated with impression-making owing to the convergence of placed implants.

RESUMEN

Although dental patterns are unique, the use of bitemark analysis in personal identification remains controversial. To accurately reproduce and compare three-dimensional models of bitemarks and dental arches, intraoral three-dimensional scans, commonly utilized in clinical dental practice for precise and stable digital impressions, are recommended. This study aims to compare two different techniques for bitemark analysis: a digital method based on the superimposition of digital scans of dental patterns and lesions, and a visual method based on the physical superimposition of impressions and resin casts produced by 3D printing. A sample of 12 volunteers (6 males and 6 females) with a mean age of 26 years was collected as biters. Each subject was asked to bite on custom supports made from semi-rigid water bottles covered with imprintable dental wax. The dental arches and bitemarks were then recorded using an intraoral scanner and dental impressions. Scan superimposition analysis was conducted using CloudCompare software, while resin casts were printed using a 3D printer and physically superimposed on the bitemark impressions by a blind operator, who was not involved in sample collection, bite test execution, prior cast acquisition, or CloudCompare analysis. Both superimposition techniques relied on the selection of 10 corresponding landmarks (on canines and central and lateral incisors of the upper and lower arches) between the dental arches and impressions. The digital superimposition showed an average concordance of 92.5% for the upper arch landmarks and 85% for the lower arch landmarks, with an overall average concordance of 88.8% for both arches combined. In contrast, the visual analysis of resin casts showed an average concordance of 77.5% for the upper arch and 76.7% for the lower arch, with an overall average of 77.1% for both arches combined. In the analysis performed using CloudCompare, the maxillary arch demonstrated the best superimposition, with 4 landmarks (R0, R1, R2, R5) consistently overlapping. The digital analysis outperformed the visual analysis in all four quadrants, particularly in the upper right arch compared to the lower left arch, thereby supporting the integration of digital techniques in forensic applications. Further studies are necessary to validate the digital technique on a larger sample, including subjects with different dental characteristics, bite dynamics, and varying types of supports and substrates.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the deviation of hypermobile teeth in partially edentulous dental arches during impression taking using digital and conventional techniques. METHODS: A partially edentulous mandibular model with three target hypermobile teeth (including the left first premolar, #34; left second molar, #37; and right first premolar, #44), was used as the simulation model. After reference data were acquired using a desktop scanner, impressions of the simulation model were obtained using a digital intraoral scanner (IOS) and two conventional techniques (hydrocolloid material with a stock tray and silicone material with a custom tray as impression data (n=12/group). The three-dimensional accuracy (root mean square value) and two-dimensional accuracy (mesiodistal and buccolingual displacements) of the target teeth in each impression dataset were calculated based on the reference data. The comparison among three impression techniques was statistically performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test (α=0.05). RESULTS: For #34 and #44, the three- and two-dimensional accuracies of the impressions fabricated through data acquired through digital scanning (digital impression) were significantly superior to those of the hydrocolloid impression (P < 0.05), whereas no significant difference was found between the digital and silicone impressions. For #37, no significant difference in the accuracy of the impression data for the target teeth was observed among the three impression techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Digital impression acquiring using an IOS is recommended over using a conventional hydrocolloid impression to prevent the deviation of hypermobile teeth in partially edentulous dental arches. Hypermobile tooth deviation in digital impression data depends on the tooth location.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The purpose of the present scoping review is to map the literature reporting on the application of digital workflows and digital technologies in the diagnosis, treatment, or management of dental conditions in paediatric patients. Furthermore, the review focuses on identifying possible knowledge gaps in the area and developing specific recommendations for future investigations. METHODS: An electronic search was performed on 3 databases up to July 2023. After the authors independently screened the retrieved articles, they extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias using the JBI (The Joanna Briggs Institute) critical appraisal tools and the Cochrane Risk of Bias 1 tool, depending on the study design assessed. RESULTS: After full-text assessment, 58 studies were identified that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results were divided into two groups according to the study design: 36 were research articles, and 22 were case reports; only the research articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. The most common topic was Scanners/3 d digital model analysis (11 articles), followed by Digital Imaging (8 articles). Digital applications were also a popular topic, and tele-dentistry and artificial intelligence were also present in the included studies. CONCLUSION: Studies investigating the use of digital workflows and digital technologies in the diagnosis, treatment or management of dental conditions in paediatric dentistry are lacking. In general, future investigations should be based on higher quality studies; furthermore, the lack of studies on the clinical validation of digitally fabricated orthodontic devices and restorations in paediatric patients provides insights for future research.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of intraoral scanning is critical for computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing workflows in dentistry. However, data regarding the scanning accuracy of various adjacent restorative materials and intraoral scanners are lacking. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the effect of adjacent restorative material type and CEREC's intraoral scanners on the accuracy of intraoral digital impressions for inlay cavities. METHODS: The artificial tooth was prepared with an occlusal cavity depth of 2 mm, a proximal box width at the gingival floor of 1.5 mm, and an equi-gingival margin extended disto-occlusally at the transition line angle on both the lingual and buccal sides for an inlay restoration. The adjacent teeth were veneered with crowns made of gold and zirconia, and an artificial tooth (resin) was utilized as the control group. The inlay cavity and adjacent teeth (Gold, Zirconia, and resin) were scanned 10 times using Chairside Economical Restoration of Esthetic Ceramics (CEREC) Primescan (PS), Omnicam (OC), and Bluecam (BC). A reference scan was obtained using a laboratory scanner (3-shape E3). Scanning was performed according to the manufacturer's instructions, including powder application for the BC group. Standard tesselation language files were analyzed using a three-dimensional analysis software program. Experimental data were analyzed using a two-way analysis of variance and the Tukey's post-hoc comparison test. RESULTS: The restorative materials of the adjacent teeth significantly affected the accuracy of the intraoral digital impressions (p < .05). The zirconia group exhibited the highest trueness deviation, followed by the resin and gold groups, with each demonstrating a statistically significant difference (p < .05). The resin group demonstrated the highest maximum positive deviation and deviation in precision. Gold exhibited the lowest average deviation value for trueness compared with those of the other adjacent restorative materials. Intraoral scanner type significantly influenced the trueness and precision of the scan data (p < .05). The average deviation of trueness according to the intraoral scanner type increased in the following order: BC > PS > OC. The average deviation in precision increased in the following order: PS>OC>BC (p < .05). CONCLUSION: The restorative materials of the adjacent tooth and the type of intraoral scanner affect the accuracy of the intraoral digital impression. The trueness of the digital images of the BC group, obtained by spraying the powder, was comparable to that of the PS group. Among the adjacent restorative materials, zirconia exhibited the lowest trueness. In contrast, PS demonstrated the highest precision among the intraoral scanners, while resin displayed the lowest precision among the adjacent restorative materials.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

As digital technology becomes more prevalent in the practice of dental medicine, methods to fully replace 2-dimensional photography and analog devices such as the facebow are still in their infancy. As more practices adopt 3-dimensional (3D) intraoral scanners, effective digital communication of the relationships between the teeth and the face becomes essential. With the high cost of intraoral scanners, the additional expense of a face scanner is not a feasible investment for many practices. This article explores a technique for meshing (lower resolution) facial data obtained from a smartphone-based scanner with high-resolution intraoral scan data. In this approach, the data from a free 3D scanning application on a smartphone and a traditional intraoral scanner are meshed so that high-resolution data are available for intraoral features and lower resolution data are used to capture the gross contours of the face. In this way, a hybrid-resolution composite scan that incorporates all of the data needed to simulate the face and accurately reproduce the teeth is generated without the cost of additional scanning equipment. This article defines a new term, the facial registration scan, for use alongside the familiar digital bite registration obtained with an intraoral scanner. To illustrate the clinical use of the hybrid-resolution scan concept, this article presents a case in which this method was used for the restoration of maxillary anterior implants.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: As the demand for digital dentistry constantly increases, digital devices are gradually replacing conventional methods of recording occlusal contacts. The study aimed to assess the inter-rater reliability of occlusal contact point detection using 40 µm articulating paper, Medit i700, and OccluSense and to compare the distribution of occlusal contacts using the articulating paper and intraoral scanner. Material and Methods: The study included 25 participants aged 20 to 30 (13 women and 12 men). Photographs of contact points were taken and marked in maximum intercuspal position (MIP), in protrusive and laterotrusive movements, on working and non-working sides using 40 µm articulating paper and digital devices. The Cohen's Kappa coefficient assessed the inter-rater reliability. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare dependent groups, articulating paper, and Medit i700. Results: The Cohen's Kappa index showed that almost perfect agreement was achieved with 40 µm articulating paper. Compared to Medit i700, the 40 µm articulating paper showed an increased mean number of contacts per tooth, except for the third molars. Conclusions: The 40 µm articulating paper has detected more overall contacts than the digital devices, particularly in the posterior areas. An ideal method for registering occlusal contacts has not been established yet.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: This study compared the accuracy of seven intraoral scanners (IOS) by the virtual-fit method. METHODS: Four maxillary arches with tooth abutments were scanned with an industrial reference scanner (n=1) and by Aoralscan3, EmeraldS, Helios600, Lumina, Mediti700, Primescan, and Trios5 IOSs (each n=12). Two complete-arch fixed frameworks were designed on each IOS scan with a 70 µm (group 70) and a 90 µm internal cement space (group 70+20, additional 20 µm at the margin). The virtual-fit method was comprised of superimposing the framework designs onto the reference scan using a non-penetrating algorithm simulating the clinical try-in. Internal and marginal gaps were measured. Precision was estimated by the mean absolute errors (MAE). RESULTS: In group 70, Mediti700 (43 µm), Primescan (42 µm), and EmeraldS were in the best homogenous subset for the marginal gap, followed by the Lumina (67 µm), Aoralscan3 (70 µm), and Trios5 (70 µm), whereas Helios600 (118 µm) was in the third subset. Based on the MAE at the margin, Mediti700, Trios5, and EmeraldS were in the first-best homogenous subset, followed by Primescan. Lumina and Helios600 were in the third subset, and Aoralscan3 was in the fourth subset. In group 70+20, the marginal gap was significantly decreased for Lumina and Aoralscan3, whereas MAE significantly decreased for EmeraldS and Aoralscan3. The rank of IOSs was similar for the internal gap. CONCLUSION: EmeraldS, Mediti700, Primescan, and Trios5 meet the marginal and internal fit criteria for fixed tooth-borne complete arch restorations. Increasing the cement space during design could enhance restoration fit. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The virtual-fit alignment method can effectively evaluate the accuracy of different intraoral scanners, offering valuable clinical guidance for distinguishing among them. Recent software and hardware versions of long-standing IOS manufacturers are suitable for fabricating complete arch restoration.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To measure the influence of scanning pattern on the accuracy, time, and number of photograms of complete-arch intraoral implant scans. METHODS: A maxillary edentulous patient with 7 implants was selected. The reference implant cast was obtained using conventional methods (7Series Scanner). Four groups were created based on the scanning pattern used to acquire the complete-arch implant scans by using an intraoral scanner (IOS) (Trios4): manufacturer's recommended (Occlusal-Buccal-Lingual (OBL)), zig-zag (Zig-zag), circumferential (Circumf), and novel pattern that included locking an initial occlusal scan (O-Lock group) (n = 15). Scanning time and number of photograms were recorded. The linear and angular measurements were used to assess scanning accuracy. One-way ANOVA and Tukey tests were used to analyze trueness, scanning time, and number of photograms. The Levene test was selected to assess precision (α=0.05). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences in trueness were detected among OBL, Zig-zag, Circumf, and O-Lock regarding linear discrepancy (P<0.01), angular discrepancy (P<0.01), scanning time (P<0.01), and number of photograms (P<0.01). The O-Lock (63 ± 20 µm) showed the best linear trueness with statistically significant differences (P < 0.01) with Circumferential (86 ± 16 µm) and OBL (87 ± 19 µm) groups. The O-Lock (93.5 ± 13.4 s, 1080 ± 104 photograms) and Circumf groups (102.9 ± 15.1 s, 1112 ± 179 photograms) obtained lower scanning times (P < 0.01) and number of photograms (P < 0.01) than OBL (130.3 ± 19.4 s, 1293 ± 161 photograms) and Zig-zag (125.7 ± 22.1 s, 1316 ± 160 photograms) groups. CONCLUSIONS: The scanning patterns tested influenced scanning accuracy, time, and number of photograms of the complete-arch scans obtained by using the IOS tested. The zig-zag and O-Lock scanning patterns are recommended to obtain complete-arch implant scans when using the selected IOS.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the clinical, radiological, and histological outcomes of socket seal surgery between two protocols: deproteinized demineralized tooth matrix (dpDTM) and freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) each covered with a free gingival graft. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty extraction sockets in the anterior or premolar region were randomly allocated to either the dpDTM or FDBA protocol (n = 10 per group). Measurements of the alveolar ridge changes were obtained using an intraoral scanner and cone-beam computed tomography at 3 months post-operation. Three-month post surgery, the dental implant was installed (n = 5 per group), bone biopsies were obtained for histomorphometrical and micro-computed tomography analyses. Implant stability quotients (ISQs) were determined and compared at 3 months post-implant. RESULTS: Lower significant reductions in buccal alveolar ridge height and hard tissue volume were observed in dpDTM group compared to FDBA group at 3 months (0.25 ± 0.35 mm vs. 1.60 ± 0.66 mm [p = .000] and 9.64 ± 15.39% mm3 vs. 31.45 ± 18.11% mm3 [p = .010], respectively). At the same time, lower soft tissue volume reduction was detected in the dpDTM group compared to FDBA group (4.21 ± 5.25% mm3 vs. 5.25 ± 5.79% mm3). No statistically significant difference in the percentage of mineralized tissue formation was found between dpDTM group (53.39 ± 11.16%) and FDBA group (49.90 ± 3.27%). Even though the ISQ in the dpDTM group showed a higher value than the FDBA group at 3 months post-implant, the results were without statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Alveolar ridge preservation using dpDTM is an efficacious procedure for providing the conditions for the development of functional and esthetic implants.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To present the first clinical application of a novel mixed reality-based dynamic navigation (MR-DN) system in the rehabilitation of a single tooth gap. METHODS: The protocol consisted of the following: (1) three-dimensional patient data acquisition using intraoral scanning (IOS) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), (2) implant planning using guided surgery software, (3) holography-guided implant placement using the novel MR-DN system (ANNA®, MARS Dental, Haifa, Israel) and (4) placement accuracy verification. RESULTS: The novel MR-DN system was safe and time-efficient, as the surgery took 30 min from anaesthesia to suturing. The accuracy of implant placement was high with minimal deviations recorded in the three planes of space compared to the presurgical planning: the error at the entry point planar distance (XY) was 0.381 mm, and the entry point planar distance (Z) was 0.173 mm, for a 3D entry point distance (En) of 0.417 mm. A 3D apex deviation (An) of 0.193 mm was registered, with an angle difference of 1.852° Conclusions: This proof-of-concept study demonstrated the clinical feasibility of MR-DN for guided implant placement in single tooth gaps. Further clinical studies on a large sample of patients are needed to confirm these positive preliminary results. Statement of clinical relevance: The use of MR-DN can change the perspectives of guided dental implant surgery as a possible alternative to the classic static and dynamic guided surgical techniques for the rehabilitation of single tooth gaps.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic validity of ICDAS clinical criteria on 3D dental models from intraoral scanning. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis on part of the baseline sample collected in a cohort study and included 73 participants (12-19 years) from Denmark and Greece. The assessment was made by visual inspection, and then by visual inspection associated with radiographs. All participants were scanned with TRIOS 4 which uses white light to obtain the 3D models with tooth color, as well as blue light source (415 nm) for fluorescence. The 3D models' evaluation was conducted using tooth-color texture and subsequently fluorescence. Two scores were obtained for the 3D model examination: i) ICDAS based on tooth-color information; ii) ICDAS based on tooth-color information supplemented with fluorescence. For the analysis, weighted kappa, sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP) and accuracy (ACC) were calculated. RESULTS: Regarding all lesions the values for SE, SP, and ACC were respectively 0.804, 0.801, and 0.802 for tooth-color, and 0.819, 0.808, and 0.810 for tooth-color supplemented with fluorescence. In terms of accuracy parameters for moderate-extensive lesions, the values for SE, SP, and ACC for tooth color were 0.709, 0.948, and 0.944, while for fluorescence they were 0.815, 0.937, and 0.934. CONCLUSION: Caries assessment with ICDAS criteria on 3D dental models produces reliable scores. Visual caries analysis using 3D models demonstrates commendable diagnostic accuracy and reasonable consistency with traditional methods. The use of intraoral scanners may be beneficial in evaluating occlusal caries. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The importance of this study is to prove the diagnostic accuracy of caries lesions diagnosis made using and intraoral scanner and to offer greater confidence to professionals who use this diagnosis tool in their daily clinical practice. Intraoral scanners demonstrate to be an accurate tool for diagnosing occlusal caries.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Accurately mounting dental casts on an articulator is an essential step in prosthetic treatments. In digital dentistry, virtual articulator mounting procedures rely on virtual facebow records. However, virtual facebow records usually require devices like face scanners or jaw motion tracking systems that are not commonly available in most dental practices. The present technique report describes a straightforward intraoral scanner-based virtual facebow transfer approach. In this technique, a reference facebow joint support was first scanned and aligned with a virtual articulator. Then, a patient's facebow joint support and bite fork assembly were scanned chairside with an intraoral scanner and aligned with the virtual articulator by matching common features with the reference facebow joint support. After aligning the patient's intraoral scans with the patient's bite fork scan that was already superimposed on the virtual articulator, a virtual mounting process was achieved. Once the corresponding reference facebow joint supports have been generated, this technique can be easily implemented with most facebow systems and be seamlessly integrated into daily clinical practice as only an intraoral scanner and a conventional facebow were required.

RESUMEN

(1) Background: Intraoral scanners undergo rapid advancements in hardware and software, prompting frequent updates by manufacturers. (2) Aim: This study aimed to quantitatively assess the precision of full dental arch digital impressions obtained from four different intraoral scanners: Trios 5-3SHAPE, Copenhagen, Denmark, CEREC Primescan- Dentsply Sirona, New York, NY, USA, Planmeca Emerald S-Planmeca Oy, Helsinki, Finland, and Medit i700-Medit Corp, Seoul, Republic of Korea. (3) Methods: A maxillary virtual dental model (digital master model) was created in accordance with ISO standard 20896-1. Subsequently, a 3D-printed model was obtained from the master model's STL file and scanned 15 times consecutively with each scanner. STL files were aligned with the master model's STL using Medit Link-Medit Design software v.3.1.0. The accuracy was evaluated by measuring deviations in micrometers between each scanner's scans and the master model. (4) Results: The study revealed variations in accuracy ranging from 23 to 32 µm across scans of the same dental arch, irrespective of the scanner used and scanning strategy employed. The anterior regions exhibited higher precision (Mean Absolute Deviation of 112 µm) compared to the posterior regions (Mean Absolute Deviation of 127 µm). Trios 5 demonstrated the smallest deviation (average 112 µm), indicating superior accuracy among the scanners tested. Emerald S and Medit i700 exhibited balanced performance (average 117 µm and 114 µm, respectively), while Primescan consistently displayed high deviation (average 127 µm). (5) Conclusions: Based on clinically accepted thresholds for accuracy in intraoral scanning, which are typically 200 µm for full arch scans, Trios 5 surpasses these benchmarks with its average deviation falling within the 200 µm range. Emerald S and Medit i700 also meet these standards, while Primescan, although showing high overall deviation, approaches the upper limit of clinical acceptability. Considering the limitations of an in vitro investigation, the findings demonstrate that each intraoral scanner under evaluation is capable of reliably and consistently capturing a full arch scan for dentate patients.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Dental occlusion refers to the static and dynamic relationships that are established between the teeth of the two arches and is an important factor in the homeostasis of the dento-maxillary system. The objective of the present study was to compare two digital occlusal analysis systems: the T-Scan III system and the Medit I600 intraoral scanner. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was carried out on 20 students from the Faculty of Dental Medicine Craiova, whose dental occlusion was assessed with the T-Scan III system and with the Medit I600 intraoral scanner. Dental occlusion was assessed in the maximum intercuspation position, the edge-to-edge protrusion position, and the edge-to-edge position in right and left laterotrusion. The images of the 2D occlusal contact areas obtained by both methods were converted to .jpeg format and then transferred to Adobe Photoshop CS6 2021 (Adobe Systems, San Jose, CA, USA) for comparison. The recorded data were statistically processed. RESULTS: Analyzing the data provided by the two digital occlusal analysis systems, it was found that the T-Scan III system provided data related to the amplitude of the occlusal forces, the surface on which they were distributed (the contact surface), the dynamics of the occlusal contacts, and the proportion in which they were distributed at the level of the two hemiarches, and the Medit I600 intraoral scanner performed an evaluation of the occlusal interface of the two arches, highlighting the extent of the contact areas with the degree of overlapping of the occlusal components. Although both methods of occlusal analysis recorded the highest values for the maximum intercuspation position, the results could not be compared. CONCLUSIONS: The two digital systems provide different data in occlusal analysis. As the T-Scan III system is considered the gold standard for occlusal analysis, more studies are needed to understand the data provided by the Medit I600 intraoral scanner and their significance.

RESUMEN

Intraoral scanners are widely used in a clinical setting for orthodontic treatments and tooth restorations, and are also useful for assessing dental wear and pathology progression. In this study, we assess the utility of using an intraoral scanner and associated software for quantifying dental tissue loss in non-human primates. An upper and lower second molar for 31 captive hamadryas baboons (Papio hamadryas) were assessed for dental tissue loss progression, giving a total sample of 62 teeth. The animals are part of the Southwest National Primate Research Center and were all fed the same monkey-chow diet over their lifetimes. Two molds of each dentition were taken at either two- or three-year intervals, and the associated casts scanned using an intraoral scanner (Medit i700). Tissue loss was calculated in WearCompare by superimposition of the two scans followed by subtraction analysis. Four individuals had dental caries, and were assessed separately. The results demonstrate the reliability of these techniques in capturing tissue loss data, evidenced by the alignment consistency between scans, lack of erroneous tissue gain between scans, and uniformity of tissue loss patterns among individuals (e.g., functional cusps showing the highest degree of wear). The average loss per mm2 per year for all samples combined was 0.05 mm3 (0.04 mm3 for females and 0.08 mm3 for males). There was no significant difference in wear progression between upper and lower molars. Substantial variation in the amount of tissue loss among individuals was found, despite their uniform diet. These findings foster multiple avenues for future research, including the exploration of wear progression across dental crowns and arcades, correlation between different types of tissue loss (e.g., attrition, erosion, fractures, caries), interplay between tissue loss and microwear/topographic analysis, and the genetic underpinnings of tissue loss variation.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In the realm of cleft lip and palate (CLP) care, the integration of intraoral scanners (IOS) may offer a promising avenue, enabling precise digital imaging, record-keeping, treatment planning and execution. This scoping review aimed to explore the current applications of IOS in CLP patients and discuss potential future directions for optimizing the utilization of IOS in cleft care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The review was registered apriori in the Open Science Framework (OSF) Registries (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/KPD34). A systematic search was conducted across various databases like Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, Grey literature, and Trial registries using a broad search strategy. The articles published in any language till December 20, 2023 were considered. Studies that demonstrated the application of intraoral scanning in nonsyndromic CLP patients were included. A validated sixteen-item content assessment tool was used to evaluate the included studies. Two independent reviewers performed data extraction and content assessment. RESULTS: Fifteen research studies and thirteen case reports/series were included in the final analysis. Various applications included capturing intraoral and extraoral images, scanning orthodontic study models, assessing dental changes, monitoring treatment changes related to nasoalveolar molding therapy, and fabricating appliances. The content assessment showed below-average mean scores of 34.79 ± 9.37% for research studies and 39.7 ± 0.14% for case reports/series. This can be attributed to insufficient information on scanning parameters, methodology, accuracy, patient outcomes, limitations, and potential solutions. The reproducibility of landmark identification in IOS was within 0.2 mm. Patients and caregivers preferred digital impressions over traditional alginate methods, reporting positive experiences in 84.8% of cases. CONCLUSION: Intraoral scanners offer good clinical accuracy and validity in assessing dentofacial and nasolabial morphology in cleft patients. Adopting IOS can streamline clinical workflows, enhance treatment accuracy, and improve patient outcomes in managing cleft lip and palate.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of complete maxillary and mandibular edentulous arch scans obtained using two different intraoral scanners (IOSs), with and without scanning aids, and to compare these results to those obtained using conventional impression methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two IOSs were used (TRIOS 4 [TRI] and Emerald S [EMR]) to scan maxillary and mandibular typodonts. The typodonts were scanned without scanning aids [TRI_WSA and EMR_WSA groups] (n = 10). The typodonts were then scanned under four scanning aid conditions (n = 10): composite markers [TRI_MRK and EMR_MRK groups], scanning spray [TRI_SPR and EMR_SPR groups], pressure indicating paste [TRI_PIP and EMR_PIP groups], and liquid-type scanning aid [TRI_LQD and EMR_LQD groups]. Conventional impressions of both arches were also made using irreversible hydrocolloids in stock trays [IHC] and using polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression material in custom trays (n = 10) which were digitized using a laboratory scanner. Using a metrology software program, all scans were compared to a reference scan in order to assess trueness and to each other to assess precision. Trueness and precision were expressed as the root mean square (RMS) of the absolute deviation values and the statistical analysis was modeled on a logarithmic scale using fixed-effects models to meet model assumptions (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The main effect of arch (p = 0.004), scanner (p < 0.001), scanning aid (p = 0.041), and the interaction between scanner and scanning aid (p = 0.027) had a significant effect on mean RMS values of trueness. The arch (p = 0.015) and scanner (p < 0.001) had a significant effect on the mean RMS values of precision. The maxillary arch had better accuracy compared to the mandible. The TRIOS 4 scanner had better accuracy than both the Emerald S scanner and conventional impressions. The Emerald S had better precision than conventional impressions. The scanning spray and liquid-type scanning aids produced the best trueness with the TRIOS 4 scanner, while the liquid-type scanning aid and composite markers produced the best trueness for the Emerald S scanner. CONCLUSION: The scanned arch and the type of scanner had a significant effect on the accuracy of digital scans of completely edentulous arches. The scanning aid had a significant effect on the trueness of digital scans of completely edentulous arches which varied depending on the scanner used.