Evaluation of Accuracy of Intraoral Scanner with Different Inlay Preparation Geometry

Bengü Doğu Kaya; Yunus Emre Özden; Zeynep Özkurt Kayahan; Pınar Yılmaz Atalı

Makale detayları

Evaluation of Accuracy of Intraoral Scanner with Different Inlay Preparation Geometry

Yazarlar:

Bengü Doğu Kaya | Yunus Emre Özden | Zeynep Özkurt Kayahan | Pınar Yılmaz Atalı

Yayıncı:

Marmara University

Ana Başlıklar:

Prosthodontics

Dergi:

Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences Vol.15 Issue 2, pp.421-426

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2025

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001352337

pISSN:

2459-1459

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 Objective: This in vitro study aimed to assess the accuracy of an intraoral scanner in inlay preparations with different geometry. Methods: The upper second premolar tooth-shaped models were designed and prepared using a 3D printer Phrozen Mega 8K, Phrozen, Taiwan. Three distinct inlay preparation configurations were utilized, including buccal and palatal wall divergence at 6, 8, and 10. The reference 3D images were acquired through scanning of each model with varying inlay preparation using an extraoral scanner E1, 3Shape, Denmark. Thirty 3D images samples were obtained from each of the three models n  10 using an intraoral scanner Trios 3, 3Shape, Denmark. The samples and reference images were saved in Standard Tessellation Language STL and imported into software Geomagic Control X 2022, 3D Systems Inc., USA. Discrepancies between the reference image and the samples were recorded as root mean square RMS and standard deviation SD. Kruskal Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests, and interquartile range IQR were used for statistical analysis with THE significance level p.05. Results: The RMS was highest at 6, both of which were statistically significant from the other degrees p.001. Highest SD values were obtained in 10 samples p.001. To evaluate the infer precision with IQR, RMS values were smallest at 10 and SD values smallest at 6. Conclusion: The divergence angle of the preparation in the inlay cavities can potentially affect the accuracy of the intraoral scanner.

 Objective: This in vitro study aimed to assess the accuracy of an intraoral scanner in inlay preparations with different geometry. Methods: The upper second premolar tooth-shaped models were designed and prepared using a 3D printer Phrozen Mega 8K, Phrozen, Taiwan. Three distinct inlay preparation configurations were utilized, including buccal and palatal wall divergence at 6, 8, and 10. The reference 3D images were acquired through scanning of each model with varying inlay preparation using an extraoral scanner E1, 3Shape, Denmark. Thirty 3D images samples were obtained from each of the three models n  10 using an intraoral scanner Trios 3, 3Shape, Denmark. The samples and reference images were saved in Standard Tessellation Language STL and imported into software Geomagic Control X 2022, 3D Systems Inc., USA. Discrepancies between the reference image and the samples were recorded as root mean square RMS and standard deviation SD. Kruskal Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests, and interquartile range IQR were used for statistical analysis with THE significance level p.05. Results: The RMS was highest at 6, both of which were statistically significant from the other degrees p.001. Highest SD values were obtained in 10 samples p.001. To evaluate the infer precision with IQR, RMS values were smallest at 10 and SD values smallest at 6. Conclusion: The divergence angle of the preparation in the inlay cavities can potentially affect the accuracy of the intraoral scanner.

 Objective: This in vitro study aimed to assess the accuracy of an intraoral scanner in inlay preparations with different geometry. Methods: The upper second premolar tooth-shaped models were designed and prepared using a 3D printer Phrozen Mega 8K, Phrozen, Taiwan. Three distinct inlay preparation configurations were utilized, including buccal and palatal wall divergence at 6, 8, and 10. The reference 3D images were acquired through scanning of each model with varying inlay preparation using an extraoral scanner E1, 3Shape, Denmark. Thirty 3D images samples were obtained from each of the three models n  10 using an intraoral scanner Trios 3, 3Shape, Denmark. The samples and reference images were saved in Standard Tessellation Language STL and imported into software Geomagic Control X 2022, 3D Systems Inc., USA. Discrepancies between the reference image and the samples were recorded as root mean square RMS and standard deviation SD. Kruskal Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests, and interquartile range IQR were used for statistical analysis with THE significance level p.05. Results: The RMS was highest at 6, both of which were statistically significant from the other degrees p.001. Highest SD values were obtained in 10 samples p.001. To evaluate the infer precision with IQR, RMS values were smallest at 10 and SD values smallest at 6. Conclusion: The divergence angle of the preparation in the inlay cavities can potentially affect the accuracy of the intraoral scanner.

 Objective: This in vitro study aimed to assess the accuracy of an intraoral scanner in inlay preparations with different geometry. Methods: The upper second premolar tooth-shaped models were designed and prepared using a 3D printer Phrozen Mega 8K, Phrozen, Taiwan. Three distinct inlay preparation configurations were utilized, including buccal and palatal wall divergence at 6, 8, and 10. The reference 3D images were acquired through scanning of each model with varying inlay preparation using an extraoral scanner E1, 3Shape, Denmark. Thirty 3D images samples were obtained from each of the three models n  10 using an intraoral scanner Trios 3, 3Shape, Denmark. The samples and reference images were saved in Standard Tessellation Language STL and imported into software Geomagic Control X 2022, 3D Systems Inc., USA. Discrepancies between the reference image and the samples were recorded as root mean square RMS and standard deviation SD. Kruskal Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests, and interquartile range IQR were used for statistical analysis with THE significance level p.05. Results: The RMS was highest at 6, both of which were statistically significant from the other degrees p.001. Highest SD values were obtained in 10 samples p.001. To evaluate the infer precision with IQR, RMS values were smallest at 10 and SD values smallest at 6. Conclusion: The divergence angle of the preparation in the inlay cavities can potentially affect the accuracy of the intraoral scanner.

Makale detayları

Evaluation of Accuracy of Intraoral Scanner with Different Inlay Preparation Geometry

Yazarlar:

Bengü Doğu Kaya | Yunus Emre Özden | Zeynep Özkurt Kayahan | Pınar Yılmaz Atalı

Yayıncı:

Marmara University

Ana Başlıklar:

Prosthodontics

Dergi:

Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences Vol.15 Issue 2, pp.421-426

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2025

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001352337

pISSN:

2459-1459

accuracy

divergence angle

inlay

intraoral scanner

precision

trueness.

Sayı

Makale detayları

Evaluation of Accuracy of Intraoral Scanner with Different Inlay Preparation Geometry

Yazarlar: Bengü Doğu Kaya | Yunus Emre Özden | Zeynep Özkurt Kayahan | Pınar Yılmaz Atalı

Yayıncı: Marmara University

Ana Başlıklar: Prosthodontics

Dergi: Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences Vol.15 Issue 2, pp.421-426

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 6/2025

Belge Dili: İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.): 2001352337

pISSN: 2459-1459

accuracy

divergence angle

inlay

intraoral scanner

precision

trueness.

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Bengü Doğu Kaya | Yunus Emre Özden | Zeynep Özkurt Kayahan | Pınar Yılmaz Atalı

Yayıncı:

Marmara University

Ana Başlıklar:

Prosthodontics

Dergi:

Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences Vol.15 Issue 2, pp.421-426

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2025

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001352337

pISSN:

2459-1459