The Effects of Different Restoration Materials on the Trueness of Intraoral Scanners

Mehmet Gözen; Neslihan Güntekin; Ceyda Akın

Makale detayları

The Effects of Different Restoration Materials on the Trueness of Intraoral Scanners

Yazarlar:

Mehmet Gözen | Neslihan Güntekin | Ceyda Akın

Yayıncı:

Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar:

Protez

Dergi:

Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Dergisi Issue 3, pp.18-26

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2024

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001319605

pISSN:

2687-5535

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 Aim: This study aimed to assess how different restoration materials affect the trueness of intraoral scanners. Materials and Methods: Artificial teeth on a typodont model were prepared for crowns and fixed partial dentures FPDs using full metal, monolithic zirconia, and porcelain-fused-to-metal PFM materials. Each group underwent 10 scans with a Trios intraoral scanner, generating 60 STL files. A reference scanner created a master model using scanning spray to reduce reflection errors. The STL files were aligned with reverse engineering software for comparison and were analyzed in micrometers μm using Root Mean Square RMS and Mean Distance measurements. The Levene test and two-way ANOVA with Post Hoc analysis were used for statistical evaluation. Results: The RMS deviations for the FPDs were 77.9  15.2 μm full metal, 84.6  6.9 μm monolithic zirconia, and 130  19.7 μm PFM. For the crowns, the RMS values were 76.9  6.5 μm metal, 71  8.2 μm monolithic zirconia, and 153  22.4 μm PFM. The mean distance deviations for the FPDs were 11.4  4.8 μm metal, 11.2  3.4 μm monolithic zirconia, and 18.3  2.6 μm PFM. For the crowns, the mean distances were 8.6  3.4 μm metal, 10.2  3 μm monolithic zirconia, and 24.7  3.3 μm PFM. Significant differences were noted in the PFM groups. Conclusion: Restoration materials notably affected intraoral scanner trueness, especially PFM restorations. The restoration length did not significantly affect the accuracy.

 Aim: This study aimed to assess how different restoration materials affect the trueness of intraoral scanners. Materials and Methods: Artificial teeth on a typodont model were prepared for crowns and fixed partial dentures FPDs using full metal, monolithic zirconia, and porcelain-fused-to-metal PFM materials. Each group underwent 10 scans with a Trios intraoral scanner, generating 60 STL files. A reference scanner created a master model using scanning spray to reduce reflection errors. The STL files were aligned with reverse engineering software for comparison and were analyzed in micrometers μm using Root Mean Square RMS and Mean Distance measurements. The Levene test and two-way ANOVA with Post Hoc analysis were used for statistical evaluation. Results: The RMS deviations for the FPDs were 77.9  15.2 μm full metal, 84.6  6.9 μm monolithic zirconia, and 130  19.7 μm PFM. For the crowns, the RMS values were 76.9  6.5 μm metal, 71  8.2 μm monolithic zirconia, and 153  22.4 μm PFM. The mean distance deviations for the FPDs were 11.4  4.8 μm metal, 11.2  3.4 μm monolithic zirconia, and 18.3  2.6 μm PFM. For the crowns, the mean distances were 8.6  3.4 μm metal, 10.2  3 μm monolithic zirconia, and 24.7  3.3 μm PFM. Significant differences were noted in the PFM groups. Conclusion: Restoration materials notably affected intraoral scanner trueness, especially PFM restorations. The restoration length did not significantly affect the accuracy.

 Aim: This study aimed to assess how different restoration materials affect the trueness of intraoral scanners. Materials and Methods: Artificial teeth on a typodont model were prepared for crowns and fixed partial dentures FPDs using full metal, monolithic zirconia, and porcelain-fused-to-metal PFM materials. Each group underwent 10 scans with a Trios intraoral scanner, generating 60 STL files. A reference scanner created a master model using scanning spray to reduce reflection errors. The STL files were aligned with reverse engineering software for comparison and were analyzed in micrometers μm using Root Mean Square RMS and Mean Distance measurements. The Levene test and two-way ANOVA with Post Hoc analysis were used for statistical evaluation. Results: The RMS deviations for the FPDs were 77.9  15.2 μm full metal, 84.6  6.9 μm monolithic zirconia, and 130  19.7 μm PFM. For the crowns, the RMS values were 76.9  6.5 μm metal, 71  8.2 μm monolithic zirconia, and 153  22.4 μm PFM. The mean distance deviations for the FPDs were 11.4  4.8 μm metal, 11.2  3.4 μm monolithic zirconia, and 18.3  2.6 μm PFM. For the crowns, the mean distances were 8.6  3.4 μm metal, 10.2  3 μm monolithic zirconia, and 24.7  3.3 μm PFM. Significant differences were noted in the PFM groups. Conclusion: Restoration materials notably affected intraoral scanner trueness, especially PFM restorations. The restoration length did not significantly affect the accuracy.

 Amaç: Bu çalışma, farklı restorasyon malzemelerinin ağız içi tarayıcıların doğruluğunu nasıl etkilediğini değerlendirmiştir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bir tipodont model üzerindeki yapay dişler, tam metal, monolitik zirkonya ve metal destekli porselen malzemeleri kullanılarak kron ve sabit bölümlü protez için prepare edildi. Her grup, Trios ağıziçi tarayıcı ile on kez tarandı ve toplamda 60 STL dosyası oluşturuldu. Yansımayı azaltmak için tarama spreyi kullanılarak bir referans tarayıcı ile ana model oluşturuldu. STL dosyaları tersine mühendislik yazılımı ile hizalanarak karşılaştırıldı ve mikrometre μm cinsinden Kök Ortalama Kare RMS ve Ortalama Mesafe ölçümleri ile analiz edildi. İstatistiksel değerlendirme için Levene testi ve iki yönlü ANOVA ile Post Hoc analizi kullanıldı. Bulgular: Köprü restorasyonlar için RMS sapmaları metalde 77,9  15,2 μm, monolitik zirkonyada 84,6  6,9 μm ve porselende 130  19,7 μm olarak bulundu. Kronlar için RMS değerleri tam metalde 76,9  6,5 μm, monolitik zirkonyada 71  8,2 μm ve porselende 153  22,4 μm bulundu. Köprü restorasyonlar için Ortalama Mesafe sapmaları metalde 11,4  4,8 μm, monolitik zirkonyada 11,2  3,4 μm ve porselende 18,3  2,6 μm olarak bulundu. Kronlar için Ortalama Mesafe değerleri metalde 8,6  3,4 μm, monolitik zirkonyada 10,2  3 μm ve porselende 24,7  3,3 μm bulundu. Porselen gruplarında anlamlı farklılıklar gözlendi. Sonuç: Restorasyon malzemeleri, özellikle metal destekli porselen restorasyonlarında ağız içi tarayıcıların doğruluğunu önemli ölçüde etkilemektedir. Restorasyon uzunluğu, doğruluk üzerinde önemli bir etki göstermemiştir.

Makale detayları

The Effects of Different Restoration Materials on the Trueness of Intraoral Scanners

Yazarlar:

Mehmet Gözen | Neslihan Güntekin | Ceyda Akın

Yayıncı:

Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar:

Protez

Dergi:

Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Dergisi Issue 3, pp.18-26

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2024

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001319605

pISSN:

2687-5535

Accuracy

Porcelain

Restoration

Scanner

ZirconiaDoğruluk

Porselen

Restorasyon

Tarayıcı

Zirkonya

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Mehmet Gözen | Neslihan Güntekin | Ceyda Akın

Yayıncı: Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar: Protez

Dergi: Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Dergisi Issue 3, pp.18-26

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 10/2024

Belge Dili: İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.): 2001319605

pISSN: 2687-5535

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Mehmet Gözen | Neslihan Güntekin | Ceyda Akın

Yayıncı:

Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar:

Protez

Dergi:

Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Dergisi Issue 3, pp.18-26

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2024

Belge Dili:

İngilizce

Document ID (Org No.):

2001319605

pISSN:

2687-5535