The Journal of prosthetic dentistry · 2026
Complete arch digital implant capture using a smartphone-based photogrammetry app: An in vitro comparative study of the accuracy of different fiducial marker designs.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Martínez-Marugán Alicia, Santamaría-Laorden Andrea, Gómez-Cogolludo Pablo, Rodríguez Alma Patricia Baldera, Andreu-Vázquez Cristina, Orejas-Pérez Jaime
Аннотация
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: A smartphone-based photogrammetry app has recently been introduced as an accurate and cost-effective alternative to conventional extraoral photogrammetry and intraoral photogrammetry devices for complete arch implant capture. However, the influence of the fiducial marker design on its trueness and precision has not been investigated.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of fiducial marker designs on the accuracy of a smartphone-based photogrammetry app for complete arch implant capture.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A milled titanium cast with 6 multiunit abutment (MUA) analogs was digitized and 90 complete arch implant captures were performed using a photogrammetry application (PIC app; PIC Dental) with 3 different fiducial marker configurations: standard, mini, and combined markers (n=30 per group). Linear and angular discrepancies were calculated relative to the measurements obtained on the digitized reference model with a coordinate measuring machine. The Bonferroni pairwise comparisons (α_adjusted=.0125) test was used to analyze the trueness data, and the Levene test was used to analyze the precision values.
RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found among marker designs for both linear and angular trueness and precision (P<.001). The combined configuration provided the highest accuracy, followed by the standard and mini markers. All discrepancies remained within clinically acceptable limits for passive fit in complete arch implant-supported fixed prostheses.
CONCLUSIONS: Fiducial marker design influenced the trueness and precision of complete arch digital implant captures obtained with a smartphone-based photogrammetry app. The combined configuration yielded the most accurate results, although all marker types achieved clinically acceptable accuracy.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of fiducial marker designs on the accuracy of a smartphone-based photogrammetry app for complete arch implant capture.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A milled titanium cast with 6 multiunit abutment (MUA) analogs was digitized and 90 complete arch implant captures were performed using a photogrammetry application (PIC app; PIC Dental) with 3 different fiducial marker configurations: standard, mini, and combined markers (n=30 per group). Linear and angular discrepancies were calculated relative to the measurements obtained on the digitized reference model with a coordinate measuring machine. The Bonferroni pairwise comparisons (α_adjusted=.0125) test was used to analyze the trueness data, and the Levene test was used to analyze the precision values.
RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found among marker designs for both linear and angular trueness and precision (P<.001). The combined configuration provided the highest accuracy, followed by the standard and mini markers. All discrepancies remained within clinically acceptable limits for passive fit in complete arch implant-supported fixed prostheses.
CONCLUSIONS: Fiducial marker design influenced the trueness and precision of complete arch digital implant captures obtained with a smartphone-based photogrammetry app. The combined configuration yielded the most accurate results, although all marker types achieved clinically acceptable accuracy.