Trueness of CAD/CAM digitization with a desktop scanner – an in vitro study

Joós-Kovács, Gellért Levente; Vecsei, Bálint; Körmendi, Sz.; Gyarmathy, V. Anna; Borbély, Judit; Hermann, Péter

doi:10.1186/s12903-019-0976-1

Cited by 15 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, we found a significant reduction of all linear parameters in both scanned-milled and scanned-prototyped mock-ups compared to the respective physical mock-ups. This is in agreement with previous studies suggesting that after CAD/CAM digitization the same measurements performed on virtual environment can be reduced [37], probably due to reductive algorithmic computation.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

The step further smile virtual planning: milled versus prototyped mock-ups for the evaluation of the designed smile characteristics

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Mock-up based approach allows the preview of the aesthetic rehabilitation, however, it is crucial that the mock-up does not differ from the expected aesthetic outcomes. With CAD-CAM technologies, it is possible to directly create mock-ups from virtual planned smile project, with greater accuracy and efficiency compared to the conventional moulded mock-ups. In this study, we investigated the trueness of mock-ups obtained with milling and 3D printing technology and a full digital work-flow system. Methods: Ten adults subjects were included and digital smile design/digital wax-up were performed to enhance the aesthetic of maxillary anterior region. Ten milled mock-ups and 10 prototyped mock-ups were obtained from the original .stl file and a digital analysis of trueness was carried out by superimposing the scanned-milled mockups and the scanned-prototyped mock-ups to the digital wax-up, according to the surface-to-surface matching technique. Specific linear measurements were performed to investigate and compare the dimensional characteristics of the physical manufactures, the 3D project and the scanned mock-ups. All data were statistically analyzed. A clinical test was also performed to assess the fitting of the final manufacture. Results: The prototyped mock-ups showed a significant increment of the transversal measurements (p < 0.001) while the milled mock-ups showed a significant increment of all vertical and transversal measurements (p < 0.001). The prototyped mock-ups showed good fitting after clinical tests while none of the milled mock-ups showed good adaptation (no fitting or significant clinical compensation required). Deviation analysis from the original 3D project reported a greater matching percentage for the scanned-milled mock-ups (80,31% ± 2.50) compared to the scanned-prototyped mock-ups (69,17% ± 2.64) (p < 0.001). This was in contrast with the findings from linear measurements as well as from the clinical test and may have been affected by a reductive algorithmic computation after digitization of physical mock-ups.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

The step further smile virtual planning: milled versus prototyped mock-ups for the evaluation of the designed smile characteristics

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the dental world, in fact, a real revolution is in progress, determined by the advent of digital technologies [30]. Intraoral [6,7,14], desktop [31] and face scanners [8], cone beam computed tomography [32] and digital condylographs allow acquiring a huge amount of 3D data useful for patient virtualisation [8]. This easily accessible data [17] can be used by computers for many purposes, not only to perform different CAD modelling Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial intelligence in fixed implant prosthodontics: a retrospective study of 106 implant-supported monolithic zirconia crowns inserted in the posterior jaws of 90 patients

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is a branch of computer science concerned with building smart software or machines capable of performing tasks that typically require human intelligence. We present a protocol for the use of AI to fabricate implant-supported monolithic zirconia crowns (MZCs) cemented on customized hybrid abutments. Methods: The study protocol consisted of: (1) intraoral scan of the implant position; (2) design of the individual abutment and temporary crown using computer-aided design (CAD) software; (3) milling of the zirconia abutment and the temporary polymethyl-methacrylate (PMMA) crown, with extraoral cementation of the zirconia abutment on the relative titanium bonding base, to generate an individual hybrid abutment; (4) clinical application of the hybrid abutment and the temporary PMMA crown; (5) intraoral scan of the hybrid abutment; (6) CAD of the final crown with automated margin line design using AI; (7) milling, sintering and characterisation of the final MZC; and (8) clinical application of the MZC. The outcome variables were mathematical (quality of the fabrication of the individual zirconia abutment) and clinical, such as (1) quality of the marginal adaptation, (2) of interproximal contact points and (3) of occlusal contacts, (4) chromatic integration, (5) survival and (6) success of MZCs. A careful statistical analysis was performed. Results: 90 patients (35 males, 55 females; mean age 53.3 ± 13.7 years) restored with 106 implant-supported MZCs were included in the study. The follow-up varied from 6 months to 3 years. The quality of the fabrication of individual hybrid abutments revealed a mean deviation of 44 μm (± 6.3) between the original CAD design of the zirconia abutment, and the mesh of the zirconia abutment captured intraorally at the end of the provisionalization. At the delivery of the MZCs, the marginal adaptation, quality of interproximal and occlusal contacts, and aesthetic integration were excellent. The three-year cumulative survival and success of the MZCs were 99.0% and 91.3%, respectively.

show abstract

“…The digital revolution has deeply transformed the world of dentistry. The introduction of novel devices such as intraoral [1], desktop [2], and face scanners [3]; computer-assisted design/computerassisted manufacturing (CAD/CAM) software [4]; milling units [5]; and 3D printers [6], together with new materials [7,8], has changed the face of dentistry.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for Two Implant Placement Techniques in Sinus Region (Bone Graft versus Computer-Aided Implant Surgery): A Randomized Prospective Trial

Almahrous

David-Tchouda

Sissoko

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To assess patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) for two implant placement techniques in cases of sinus bone atrophy (bone graft surgery (BGS) versus computer-aided implant surgery (CAIS)), after surgery and one year later, and to evaluate the clinical success of both treatments. Methods: Sixty patients with bone atrophy in the posterior maxilla and in need of implant placement were randomly assigned to two groups, and in accordance with the case report form (CRF), 30 were treated with BGS and 30 with CAIS. Immediately after treatment and one year later, PROMs were assessed, and the clinical success of both treatments was evaluated. Results: No significant differences were found between BGS and CAIS with regard to the following: loss of implants (p = 492); patient recommendation (p = 210); duration of surgery (p = 987); pain on the intervention day (p = 512); pain in the week after intervention (p = 299); and complications in the stage of surgery (p = 1.00). Similarly, at one year, no differences were found with regard to the following: pain around implant (p = 481); infection of implants (p = 491); abnormal radiographic imaging (p = 226); occurrence of undesirable events (p = 1.00); loss of one of the implants (p = 1.00); plaque detection (p = 1.00); bleeding on probing (p = 236); and presence of keratinized mucosa (p = 226). However, a significant difference was found among BGS and CAIS with regard to the number of consultations (p = 0001); number of implants placed (p = 033); and treatment difficulty (p = 0369). Significant differences were found for peri-implantitis (p = 0481) and radiology of craterization (p = 020) in clinical examination at the first year. Conclusion: Treatment difficulty and number of consultations were higher for BGS than for CAIS, as well as peri-implantitis and bone craterization at one year, indicating significant differences between the two treatments. However, there were no statistically significant differences between BGS and CAIS regarding the other PROMs, at placement and after one year.

show abstract

Trueness of CAD/CAM digitization with a desktop scanner – an in vitro study

Cited by 15 publications

References 39 publications

The step further smile virtual planning: milled versus prototyped mock-ups for the evaluation of the designed smile characteristics

The step further smile virtual planning: milled versus prototyped mock-ups for the evaluation of the designed smile characteristics

Artificial intelligence in fixed implant prosthodontics: a retrospective study of 106 implant-supported monolithic zirconia crowns inserted in the posterior jaws of 90 patients

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for Two Implant Placement Techniques in Sinus Region (Bone Graft versus Computer-Aided Implant Surgery): A Randomized Prospective Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About