7 research outputs found

    Trueness of Maxillomandibular Relationship in 3D-printed and Conventional Casts

    No full text
    Objectives To compare the trueness of maxillomandibular relationship between articulated 3D-printed and conventional diagnostic casts in maximum intercuspation (MIP). Methods Reference casts were articulated in MIP, and scanned using a Coordinate Measurement Machine (CMM, n=1). Digital scans were made from the reference casts by using an intraoral scanner (IOS, n=10) (Trios 4; 3Shape A/S). IOS scans were processed to create 3D-printed casts by using MAX UV385 (Asiga) and NextDent 5100 (3DSystems) 3D-printers. The conventional workflow implemented vinylpolysiloxane (VPS) impressions and Type IV stone. Stone and 3D-printed casts were articulated and digitized with a laboratory scanner (E4; 3Shape A/S). The 3D-printed casts were scanned on two occasions: with and without positioning pins. Inter-arch distances and 3D-contact area were measured and compared. Statistical tests used were Shapiro-Wilk, Levene's, Welch's t-test, and 2-way ANOVA (α=.05). Results IOS group showed similar or better maxillomandibular relationship trueness than stone casts and 3D-printed casts (p0.05). The choice of 3D-printer and presence of positioning pins on the casts significantly influenced maxillomandibular relationship trueness (p<0.05). Conclusions Articulated 3D-printed and stone casts exhibited similar maxillomandibular relationship trueness. Clinical Significance Although 3D-printing methods can introduce a considerable amount of deviations, the maxillomandibular relationship trueness of articulated 3D-printed and stone casts in MIP can be considered similar

    Clinical Study of the Influence of Ambient Light Scanning Conditions on the Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of an Intraoral Scanner

    Full text link
    PURPOSE To quantify the impact of ambient lighting conditions on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of an intraoral scanner (IOS) when maxillary complete-arch and maxillary right quadrant digital scans were performed in a patient. MATERIAL AND METHODS One complete dentate patient was selected. A complete maxillary arch vinyl polysiloxane impression was obtained and poured using Type IV dental stone. The working cast was digitized using a laboratory scanner (E4 Dental Scanner; 3Shape) and the reference standard tessellation language (STL file) was obtained. Two groups were created based on the extension of the maxillary digital scans performed namely complete-arch (CA group) and right quadrant (RQ) groups. The CA and RQ digital scans of the patient were performed using an IOS (TRIOS 3; 3Shape) with 4 lighting conditions chair light (CL), 10 000 lux, room light (RL), 1003 lux, natural light (NL), 500 lux, and no light (ZL), 0 lux. Ten digital scans per group at each ambient light settings (CL, RL, NL, and ZL) were consecutively obtained (n = 10). The STLR_{R} file was used to analyze the discrepancy between the digitized working cast and digital scans using MeshLab software. Kruskal-Wallis, one-way ANOVA, and pair-wise comparison were used to analyze the data. RESULTS Significant difference in the trueness and precision values were found across different lighting conditions where RL condition obtained the lowest absolute error compared with the other lighting conditions tested followed by CL, NL, and ZL. On the CA group, RL condition also obtained the best accuracy values, CL and NL conditions performed closely and under ZL condition the mean error presented the highest values. On the RQ group, CL condition presented the lowest absolute error when compared with the other lighting conditions evaluated. A pair-wise multicomparison showed no significant difference between NL and ZL conditions. In all groups, the standard deviation was higher than the mean errors from the control mesh, indicating that the relative precision was low. CONCLUSIONS Light conditions significantly influenced on the scanning accuracy of the IOS evaluated. RL condition obtained the lowest absolute error value of the digital scans performed. The extension of the digital scan was a scanning accuracy influencing factor. The higher the extension of the digital scan performed, the lower the accuracy values obtained. Furthermore, ambient light scanning conditions influenced differently depending on the extension of the digital scans made
    corecore