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

Evaluation of the accuracy of intraoral scanners for complete-arch scanning: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the complete-arch scanning accuracy of different intraoral scanners (IOSs) to that of reference standard tessellation language (STL) files.

DATA

Studies comparing the trueness and precision of IOS STL files with those of reference STL scans for different arch types (dentate, edentulous, completely edentulous with implants, and partially edentulous with implants) were included in this study.

SOURCES

An electronic search of five databases restricted to the English Language was conducted in October 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

A total of 3,815 studies were identified, of which 114 were eligible for inclusion. After study selection and data extraction, pair-wise comparison and NMA were performed to define the accuracy of scanning for four arch subgroups using four outcomes (trueness and precision expressed as mean absolute deviation and root mean square values). Cochrane guidelines and the QUADAS-2 tool were used to assess the risk of bias. GRADE was used for certainty assessment.

RESULTS

Fifty-three articles were included in this NMA. Altogether, 26 IOSs were compared directly and indirectly in 10 network systems. The accuracy of IOSs scans were not significantly different from the reference scans for dentate arches (three IOSs), edentulous arches (three IOSs), and completely edentulous arches with implants (one IOS). The accuracy of the IOSs was significantly different from the reference scans for partially edentulous arches with implants. Significant accuracy differences were found between the IOSs, regardless of clinical scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of complete-arch scanning by IOSs differs based on clinical scenarios.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Different IOSs should be used according to the complete arch type.

Accuracy of Computerized Optical Impression Making in Fabrication of Removable Dentures for Partially Edentulous Jaws: An In Vivo Feasibility Study

The use of computerized optical impression making (COIM) for the fabrication of removable dentures for partially edentulous jaws is a rising trend in dental prosthetics. However, the accuracy of this method compared with that of traditional impression-making techniques remains uncertain. We therefore decided to evaluate the accuracy of COIM in the context of partially edentulous jaws in an in vivo setting. Twelve partially edentulous patients with different Kennedy classes underwent both a conventional impression (CI) and a computerized optical impression (COI) procedure. The CI was then digitized and compared with the COI data using 3D analysis software. Four different comparison situations were assessed: Whole Jaw (WJ), Mucosa with Residual Teeth (M_RT), Isolated Mucosa (IM), and Isolated Abutment Teeth (AT). Statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate group differences by quantifying the deviation values between the CIs and COIs. The mean deviations between the COIs and CIs varied significantly across the different comparison situations, with mucosal areas showing higher deviations than dental hard tissue. However, no statistically significant difference was found between the maxilla and mandible. Although COIM offers a no-pressure impression method that captures surfaces without irritation, it was found to capture mucosa less accurately than dental hard tissue. This discrepancy can likely be attributed to software algorithms that automatically filter out mobile tissues. Clinically, these findings suggest that caution is required when using COIM for prosthetics involving mucosal tissues as deviations could compromise the fit and longevity of the prosthetic appliance. Further research is warranted to assess the clinical relevance of these deviations.

CAD/CAM indirect bonding trays using hard versus soft resin material: a single-blinded in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

The present in vitro study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) printed indirect bonding trays consisting of hard or soft resin materials produced using computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM).

METHODS

Forty-eight dental casts were 3D printed. Four groups based on frontal crowding were defined and divided into hard- and soft-resin groups. After virtual bracket positioning on the digital models, the transfer trays were 3D printed. To evaluate the accuracy of the procedure, measurements were performed using a digital overlay of the virtual (target) bracket position and a post-bonding scan. The horizontal, transverse, and vertical deviations and angular discrepancies were analyzed. The loss rate was evaluated descriptively as a percentage.

RESULTS

A total of 553 brackets were bonded using 24 soft and 24 resilient indirect bonding trays. The mean deviations were of 0.05 mm (transversal), 0.05 mm (horizontal), 0.09 mm (vertical), 0.13° (angulation) in the resilient resin group and of 0.01 mm (transversal), 0.08 mm (horizontal), 0.08 mm (vertical), 0.37° (angular) in the soft resin group. The loss rate was 6.9% and 0.7% in the hard and soft resin groups, respectively. Angular deviations were significantly higher in the soft resin group (P = 0.009), whereas the loss rate was considerably higher in the hard resin group (P < 0.001).

SIGNIFICANCE

The findings indicate that indirect bonding using CAD/CAM is an accurate procedure in the laboratory setting. Soft resins are considered favorable for loss rate and useability.

Evaluating the accuracy of CAD/CAM optimized stones compared to conventional type IV stones

This study compared the accuracy (trueness and precision) of stone models fabricated using two brands of CAD/CAM optimized stones Cerec Stone (BC) and Elite Master (EM), and a conventional type IV stone Elite Rock Fast (ERF). 30 conventional Type IV and scannable stone complete-arch models were scanned with a blue LED extraoral scanner, and root mean square values were obtained. 6 abutments were used in complete-arch models. The digital models were compared with the master model to evaluate their trueness using model superimposition with Geomagic software. Precision was determined for each case by superimposing combinations of the 10 datasets in each group. The point cloud density of each model was calculated with MeshLab software. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney non-parametric tests were used for the statistical analysis. The trueness of the stone models was 96 μm for the BC, 88.2 μm for the EM, and 87.6 μm for the ERF. There were no significant differences between the tested dental stones (p = .768). However, the EM models (35.6 μm) were more precise than the BC (46.9 μm) and ERF (56.4 μm) models (p = .001, p < .001). EM models also showed the highest point cloud density. There were significant differences in point cloud density (p = .003). The EM models showed significant differences in precision but no significant differences in terms of trueness. Although EM was more precise and had the highest point cloud density, all models were within the clinically acceptable limit.

Accuracy of different laboratory scanners for scanning of implant-supported full arch fixed prosthesis

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the accuracy of different laboratory scanners (LS) for scanning of implant-supported full arch fixed prosthesis with different implant angulations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two maxillary models that are designed to receive an all-on-four implant retained prosthesis were fabricated then scanned using five different LS. The models were divided into two groups according to the angulation of the posterior implant (Group 1; 30° and group 2; 45°). Each group was then subdivided into five subgroups according to the type of LS, subgroup T; Medit T710, subgroup I; IneosX5, subgroup E; 3ShapeE4, subgroup A; Autoscan DS-Mix, and subgroup M; Ceramill Map600. An industrial 3D scanner was used as reference scanner, then each model was scanned with 5 LS 10 times. Trueness and precision were analyzed using Geomagic 3D analysis software.

RESULTS

Both scanner type and implant angle had a significant effect on the trueness (p < 0.001). Significant interaction was found between the scanner type and implant angle (p < 0.001). For scanner type tukeys post hoc test revealed highest trueness with the 3Shape E4 (21.3 ± 2.1) and the medit T710 (22.6 ± 2.1) and least trueness with the shining 3D autoscan ds-mix (33.8 ± 3.0). Significantly better trueness was observed with the 30° than the 45° angle. Regarding precision, two-way ANOVA revealed significant effect of the scanner type only (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the 3Shape E4, medit T710, Ineos X5, and the Ceramill map600. However, all showed significantly higher precision values when compared to shining 3D autoscan ds-mix.

CONCLUSIONS

All tested scanners showed results within the clinically acceptable range with 3ShapeE4 and Medit T710 showing the highest accuracy.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Tested scanners can be used for scanning of All-on-four implant supported prosthesis.

Analysis of the mesh resolution of an .STL exported from an intraoral scanner file

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to provide information on the accuracy of exported digital files with the different resolutions available in the CEREC 4.6.2 software obtained by means of an intraoral scanner (IOS), in addition to establishing differences between materialized models with different exported resolutions, and how these different exported files can influence finite element analysis (FEA) simulations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The upper complete arch of 10 patients was scanned through an IOS (CEREC Omnicam 1.0/Dentsply Sirona). Files of three resolution meshes digitalized by a CAD software (Cerec SW, 4.6.2) high, medium and low (IOSH, IOSM, and IOSL) were exported. Each file was evaluated by a software (NETFABB) about the number of triangles obtained and compared with the number announced by the manufacturer. Also, with a superimposition with a specialized software (GEOMAGIC X), the digital models were compared. The files of each resolution were printed (Sprintray 3D Printer), and the printed models were scanned with IOS (Omnicam 1.0) and compared with the control group (intraoral scanned high-resolution file, IOSH). FEA simulations were imported into COMSOL and analyzed under different loading conditions.

RESULTS

The number of exported triangles coincided with that reported by the manufacturer. The digital models from files of different resolution did not show significant differences (less than 1.5 um) between each other. Models printed (H, M, L) from files of the same resolution mesh (H, M, L) did not show significant differences between them either in partial measures of the arch and neither in the complete arch. FEA showed significant differences in stress concentration between different exported models.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Digital models can be exported and printed in three resolutions of the mesh, without differences clinically significative. On the other hand, for future FEA applications further research should be performed in order to determine the optimal number of triangles.

Evaluation of the accuracy of orthodontic models prototyped with entry-level LCD-based 3D printers: a study using surface-based superimposition and deviation analysis

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of dental models prototyped via entry-level liquid crystal display (LCD) 3D printers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Identical prototyped models were generated from a master digital file testing two entry-level LCD-based 3D printers and using one professional-grade 3D printer as gold standard (GS), with 50-µm and 100-µm layer thickness. Each 3D-printed model was scanned, and a specific 3D technology was used to perform surface-based superimposition and deviation analysis to evaluate trueness and precision. The distances between surface points of two superimposed models were converted to root mean square (RMS) and statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

The RMS values detected were significantly higher in dental models prototyped with entry-level compared to the SLA printer (p < 0.001), in terms of trueness (50 µm: GS 0.075 mm, LCD1 0.192 mm, LCD2 0.179 mm; 100 µm: GS 0.066 mm, LCD1 0.209 mm, LCD2 0.199 mm) and precision (50 µm: GS 0.028 mm, LCD1 0.075 mm, LCD2 0.085 mm; 100 µm: GS 0.039 mm, LCD1 0.096 mm, LCD2 0.101 mm). No significant differences were found between the values of RMS of both entry-level 3D printers (p > 0.05). Layer thickness did not affect either the trueness or precision of the 3D-printed models (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Entry-level LCD-based 3D printers are not as accurate as professional-grade 3D printer, but still close to orthodontics clinical threshold values.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Clinicians should evaluate the intended application of 3D-printed orthodontic models before using entry-level 3D printers.

Accuracy evaluation of 3D printed interim prosthesis fabrication using a CBCT scanning based digital model

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the marginal and internal gaps in 3D-printed interim crowns made from digital models of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) conversion data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixteen polyvinylsiloxane impressions were taken from patients for single crown restorations and were scanned using CBCT. The scanning data were converted to positive Standard Triangulation Language (STL) files using custom-developed software. The fabricated stone models were scanned with an intraoral optical scanner (IOS) to compare the surface accuracy with the STL data obtained by CBCT. The converted STL files were utilized to fabricate interim crowns with a photopolymer using a digital light-processing 3D printer. The replica method was used to analyze the accuracy. The marginal and internal gaps in the replica specimen of each interim crown were measured with a digital microscope. The Friedman test and Mann-Whitney U test (Wilcoxon-signed rank test) were conducted to compare the measurements of the marginal and internal gaps with a 95% level of confidence.

RESULTS

The root-mean-square values of the CBCT and IOS ranged from 41.00 to 126.60 μm, and the mean was 60.12 μm. The mean values of the marginal, internal, and total gaps were 132.96 (±139.23) μm, 137.86 (±103.09) μm, and 135.68 (±120.30) μm, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the marginal or internal gaps between the mesiodistal and buccolingual surfaces, but the marginal area (132.96 μm) and occlusal area (255.88 μm) had significant mean differences.

CONCLUSION

The marginal gap of the fabricated interim crowns based on CBCT STL data was within the acceptable range of clinical success. Through ongoing developments of high-resolution CBCT and the digital model conversion technique, CBCT might be an alternative method to acquire digital models for interim crown fabrication.

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

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 mock-ups 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.

CONCLUSION

Both prototype and milled mock-ups showed a slight dimensional increment comparing to the original 3D project, with milled-mock-ups showing less fitting after clinical tests. Caution must be taken when assessing the trueness of scanned manufacture since an intrinsic error in the system can underestimate the dimensions of the real object.

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

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.

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

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.

Conclusions

AI seems to represent a reliable tool for the restoration of single implants with MZCs cemented on customised hybrid abutments via a full digital workflow. Further studies are needed to confirm these positive results.