Journal of prosthodontic research · 2024
Influence of different palatal morphologies on the accuracy of intraoral scanning of the edentulous maxilla: A three-dimensional analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sorrentino Roberto, Ruggiero Gennaro, Leone Renato, Di Mauro Maria Irene, Cagidiaco Edoardo Ferrari, Joda Tim, Lo Russo Lucio, Zarone Fernando
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study investigated the influence of different palatal morphologies on the accuracy of intraoral scanning (TRIOS 4) of edentulous maxillae.
METHODS: Six typodonts were fabricated for different palatal morphologies with flat (F), medium (M), and deep (D) palates, with palatal wrinkles (W), or smooth palates (S), resulting in six groups: WF, WM, WD and SF, SM, SD. Ten scans were performed for each group; standard tessellation language files obtained were imported into a software to measure trueness and precision in micrometer. Trueness was calculated as the mean of the standard deviation values obtained by superimposing each scan onto the reference scan. Precision was achieved by overlapping each scan with that with the best trueness in the group. Descriptive and post-hoc analyses were conducted.
RESULTS: The mean values for trueness were as follows: WM=48.7±4.7, WD=161.7±18.4, WF=85.9±16, SM=48.1±2.4, SD=349.9±8.8, and SF=349.1±25.5. The precision values were as follows: WM=46.7±7.3, WD=46.9±9, WF=48.9±6.7, SM=46±2.7, SD=105.9±17.4, SF=72.6±10.8. Significant differences were observed for trueness between SM and SD (P < 0.001), SM and SF (P < 0.001), and WF and SF (P = 0.003); whereas for precision, significant differences were reported between WD and SD (P = 0.015). Regarding trueness and precision, no difference was found between WM and SM (P = 1.0).
CONCLUSIONS: Medium palatal depth showed the best accuracy. The mean accuracy values were within the clinical acceptability thresholds for all palatal morphologies. The presence of rugae improved the precision of deeper palates and the trueness of flat palates. No differences were observed in the medium palates with or without rugae.
METHODS: Six typodonts were fabricated for different palatal morphologies with flat (F), medium (M), and deep (D) palates, with palatal wrinkles (W), or smooth palates (S), resulting in six groups: WF, WM, WD and SF, SM, SD. Ten scans were performed for each group; standard tessellation language files obtained were imported into a software to measure trueness and precision in micrometer. Trueness was calculated as the mean of the standard deviation values obtained by superimposing each scan onto the reference scan. Precision was achieved by overlapping each scan with that with the best trueness in the group. Descriptive and post-hoc analyses were conducted.
RESULTS: The mean values for trueness were as follows: WM=48.7±4.7, WD=161.7±18.4, WF=85.9±16, SM=48.1±2.4, SD=349.9±8.8, and SF=349.1±25.5. The precision values were as follows: WM=46.7±7.3, WD=46.9±9, WF=48.9±6.7, SM=46±2.7, SD=105.9±17.4, SF=72.6±10.8. Significant differences were observed for trueness between SM and SD (P < 0.001), SM and SF (P < 0.001), and WF and SF (P = 0.003); whereas for precision, significant differences were reported between WD and SD (P = 0.015). Regarding trueness and precision, no difference was found between WM and SM (P = 1.0).
CONCLUSIONS: Medium palatal depth showed the best accuracy. The mean accuracy values were within the clinical acceptability thresholds for all palatal morphologies. The presence of rugae improved the precision of deeper palates and the trueness of flat palates. No differences were observed in the medium palates with or without rugae.