Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations 7/2016

07.11.2015 | Original Article

In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods for obtaining quadrant dental impressions

verfasst von: Andreas Ender, Moritz Zimmermann, Thomas Attin, Albert Mehl

Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Ausgabe 7/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

Quadrant impressions are commonly used as alternative to full-arch impressions. Digital impression systems provide the ability to take these impressions very quickly; however, few studies have investigated the accuracy of the technique in vivo. The aim of this study is to assess the precision of digital quadrant impressions in vivo in comparison to conventional impression techniques.

Materials and methods

Impressions were obtained via two conventional (metal full-arch tray, CI, and triple tray, T-Tray) and seven digital impression systems (Lava True Definition Scanner, T-Def; Lava Chairside Oral Scanner, COS; Cadent iTero, ITE; 3Shape Trios, TRI; 3Shape Trios Color, TRC; CEREC Bluecam, Software 4.0, BC4.0; CEREC Bluecam, Software 4.2, BC4.2; and CEREC Omnicam, OC). Impressions were taken three times for each of five subjects (n = 15). The impressions were then superimposed within the test groups. Differences from model surfaces were measured using a normal surface distance method. Precision was calculated using the Perc90_10 value. The values for all test groups were statistically compared.

Results

The precision ranged from 18.8 (CI) to 58.5 μm (T-Tray), with the highest precision in the CI, T-Def, BC4.0, TRC, and TRI groups. The deviation pattern varied distinctly depending on the impression method. Impression systems with single-shot capture exhibited greater deviations at the tooth surface whereas high-frame rate impression systems differed more in gingival areas. Triple tray impressions displayed higher local deviation at the occlusal contact areas of upper and lower jaw.

Conclusions

Digital quadrant impression methods achieve a level of precision, comparable to conventional impression techniques. However, there are significant differences in terms of absolute values and deviation pattern.

Clinical relevance

With all tested digital impression systems, time efficient capturing of quadrant impressions is possible. The clinical precision of digital quadrant impression models is sufficient to cover a broad variety of restorative indications. Yet the precision differs significantly between the digital impression systems.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Wostmann B, Rehmann P, Balkenhol M (2009) Accuracy of impressions obtained with dual-arch trays. Int J Prosthodont 22:158–160PubMed Wostmann B, Rehmann P, Balkenhol M (2009) Accuracy of impressions obtained with dual-arch trays. Int J Prosthodont 22:158–160PubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Small BW (2012) Revisiting impressions using dual-arch trays. Gen Dent 60:379–381PubMed Small BW (2012) Revisiting impressions using dual-arch trays. Gen Dent 60:379–381PubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat de Lima LM, Borges GA, Junior LH, Spohr AM (2014) In vivo study of the accuracy of dual-arch impressions. Journal of International oral Health: JIOH 6:50–55PubMedPubMedCentral de Lima LM, Borges GA, Junior LH, Spohr AM (2014) In vivo study of the accuracy of dual-arch impressions. Journal of International oral Health: JIOH 6:50–55PubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Reddy JM, Prashanti E, Kumar GV, Suresh Sajjan MC, Mathew X (2009) A comparative study of inter-abutment distance of dies made from full arch dual-arch impression trays with those made from full arch stock trays: an in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res Off Publ Indian Soc Dent Res 20:412–417. doi:10.4103/0970-9290.59437 CrossRef Reddy JM, Prashanti E, Kumar GV, Suresh Sajjan MC, Mathew X (2009) A comparative study of inter-abutment distance of dies made from full arch dual-arch impression trays with those made from full arch stock trays: an in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res Off Publ Indian Soc Dent Res 20:412–417. doi:10.​4103/​0970-9290.​59437 CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Goldstein JH, Werrin SR (2007) InLab CEREC restorations from a dual-arch impression. Dent Today 26(62):64 Goldstein JH, Werrin SR (2007) InLab CEREC restorations from a dual-arch impression. Dent Today 26(62):64
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Ceyhan JA, Johnson GH, Lepe X, Phillips KM (2003) A clinical study comparing the three-dimensional accuracy of a working die generated from two dual-arch trays and a complete-arch custom tray. J Prosthet Dent 90:228–234. doi:10.1016/S0022391303002373 CrossRefPubMed Ceyhan JA, Johnson GH, Lepe X, Phillips KM (2003) A clinical study comparing the three-dimensional accuracy of a working die generated from two dual-arch trays and a complete-arch custom tray. J Prosthet Dent 90:228–234. doi:10.​1016/​S002239130300237​3 CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Cayouette MJ, Burgess JO, Jones Jr RE, Yuan CH (2003) Three-dimensional analysis of dual-arch impression trays. Quintessence Int 34:189–198PubMed Cayouette MJ, Burgess JO, Jones Jr RE, Yuan CH (2003) Three-dimensional analysis of dual-arch impression trays. Quintessence Int 34:189–198PubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Abrams SH (2002) Benefits of the dual-arch impression technique. Accurate impressions and fewer than 1 % remakes. Dent Today 21:56–59PubMed Abrams SH (2002) Benefits of the dual-arch impression technique. Accurate impressions and fewer than 1 % remakes. Dent Today 21:56–59PubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Cayouette M, Burgess J, Jones RJ, Yuan C (2003) Three-dimensional analysis of dual-arch impression trays. Quintessence Int 34:189–198PubMed Cayouette M, Burgess J, Jones RJ, Yuan C (2003) Three-dimensional analysis of dual-arch impression trays. Quintessence Int 34:189–198PubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Larson T, Nielsen M, Brackett W (2002) The accuracy of dual-arch impressions: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent 87:625–627CrossRefPubMed Larson T, Nielsen M, Brackett W (2002) The accuracy of dual-arch impressions: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent 87:625–627CrossRefPubMed
12.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Reich S, Peltz I, Wichmann M, Estafan D (2005) A comparative study of two CEREC software systems in evaluating manufacturing time and accuracy of restorations. Gen Dent 53:195–198PubMed Reich S, Peltz I, Wichmann M, Estafan D (2005) A comparative study of two CEREC software systems in evaluating manufacturing time and accuracy of restorations. Gen Dent 53:195–198PubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Mattiola A, Mormann W, Lutz F (1995) The computer-generated occlusion of cerec-2 inlays and onlays. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 105:1284–1290PubMed Mattiola A, Mormann W, Lutz F (1995) The computer-generated occlusion of cerec-2 inlays and onlays. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 105:1284–1290PubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Ender A, Mehl A (2014) In vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence Int. doi:10.3290/j.qi.a32244 Ender A, Mehl A (2014) In vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence Int. doi:10.​3290/​j.​qi.​a32244
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Christensen G (2008) Will digital impressions eliminate the current problems with conventional impressions? J Am Dent Assoc 139:761–763CrossRefPubMed Christensen G (2008) Will digital impressions eliminate the current problems with conventional impressions? J Am Dent Assoc 139:761–763CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Chandran D, Jagger D, Jagger R, Barbour M (2010) Two- and three-dimensional accuracy of dental impression materials: effects of storage time and moisture contamination. Biomed Mater Eng 20:243–249. doi:10.3233/BME-2010-0638 PubMed Chandran D, Jagger D, Jagger R, Barbour M (2010) Two- and three-dimensional accuracy of dental impression materials: effects of storage time and moisture contamination. Biomed Mater Eng 20:243–249. doi:10.​3233/​BME-2010-0638 PubMed
22.
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Luthardt R, Loos R, Quaas S (2005) Accuracy of intraoral data acquisition in comparison to the conventional impression. Int J Comput Dent 8:283–294PubMed Luthardt R, Loos R, Quaas S (2005) Accuracy of intraoral data acquisition in comparison to the conventional impression. Int J Comput Dent 8:283–294PubMed
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Ziegler M (2009) Digital impression taking with reproducibly high precision. Int J Comput Dent 12:159–163PubMed Ziegler M (2009) Digital impression taking with reproducibly high precision. Int J Comput Dent 12:159–163PubMed
25.
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Flügge TV, Schlager S, Nelson K, Nahles S, Metzger MC (2013) Precision of intraoral dental impression with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 144:471–478. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.017 CrossRef Flügge TV, Schlager S, Nelson K, Nahles S, Metzger MC (2013) Precision of intraoral dental impression with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 144:471–478. doi:10.​1016/​j.​ajodo.​2013.​04.​017 CrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Silva JS A e, Erdelt K, Edelhoff D, Araujo E, Stimmelmayr M, Vieira LC, Guth JF (2014) Marginal and internal fit of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques. Clin Oral Investig 18:515–523. doi:10.1007/s00784-013-0987-2 CrossRef Silva JS A e, Erdelt K, Edelhoff D, Araujo E, Stimmelmayr M, Vieira LC, Guth JF (2014) Marginal and internal fit of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques. Clin Oral Investig 18:515–523. doi:10.​1007/​s00784-013-0987-2 CrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Brosky M, Pesun I, Lowder P, Delong R, Hodges J (2002) Laser digitization of casts to determine the effect of tray selection and cast formation technique on accuracy. J Prosthet Dent 87:204–209CrossRefPubMed Brosky M, Pesun I, Lowder P, Delong R, Hodges J (2002) Laser digitization of casts to determine the effect of tray selection and cast formation technique on accuracy. J Prosthet Dent 87:204–209CrossRefPubMed
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Delong R, Heinzen M, Hodges J, Ko C, Douglas W (2003) Accuracy of a system for creating 3D computer models of dental arches. J Dent Res 82:438–442CrossRefPubMed Delong R, Heinzen M, Hodges J, Ko C, Douglas W (2003) Accuracy of a system for creating 3D computer models of dental arches. J Dent Res 82:438–442CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Rudolph H, Luthardt R, Walter M (2007) Computer-aided analysis of the influence of digitizing and surfacing on the accuracy in dental CAD/CAM technology. Comput Biol Med 37:579–587CrossRefPubMed Rudolph H, Luthardt R, Walter M (2007) Computer-aided analysis of the influence of digitizing and surfacing on the accuracy in dental CAD/CAM technology. Comput Biol Med 37:579–587CrossRefPubMed
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Mehl A, Ender A, Mormann W, Attin T (2009) Accuracy testing of a new intraoral 3D camera. Int J Comput Dent 12:11–28PubMed Mehl A, Ender A, Mormann W, Attin T (2009) Accuracy testing of a new intraoral 3D camera. Int J Comput Dent 12:11–28PubMed
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Jedynakiewicz N, Martin N (2001) CEREC: science, research, and clinical application. Compend Contin Educ Dent 22:7–13PubMed Jedynakiewicz N, Martin N (2001) CEREC: science, research, and clinical application. Compend Contin Educ Dent 22:7–13PubMed
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Arnetzl G (2006) Different ceramic technologies in a clinical long-term comparison. Book title, Quintessenz London Arnetzl G (2006) Different ceramic technologies in a clinical long-term comparison. Book title, Quintessenz London
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Reiss B, Walther W (2000) Clinical long-term results and 10-year Kaplan-Meier analysis of cerec restorations. Int J Comput Dent 3:9–23PubMed Reiss B, Walther W (2000) Clinical long-term results and 10-year Kaplan-Meier analysis of cerec restorations. Int J Comput Dent 3:9–23PubMed
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Hoyos A, Soderholm K (2011) Influence of tray rigidity and impression technique on accuracy of polyvinyl siloxane impressions. Int J Prosthodont 24:49–54PubMed Hoyos A, Soderholm K (2011) Influence of tray rigidity and impression technique on accuracy of polyvinyl siloxane impressions. Int J Prosthodont 24:49–54PubMed
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Ceyhan J, Johnson G, Lepe X, Phillips K (2003) A clinical study comparing the three-dimensional accuracy of a working die generated from two dual-arch trays and a complete-arch custom tray. J Prosthet Dent 90:228–234. doi:10.1016/S0022391303002373 CrossRefPubMed Ceyhan J, Johnson G, Lepe X, Phillips K (2003) A clinical study comparing the three-dimensional accuracy of a working die generated from two dual-arch trays and a complete-arch custom tray. J Prosthet Dent 90:228–234. doi:10.​1016/​S002239130300237​3 CrossRefPubMed
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Rudolph H, Graf MR, Kuhn K, Rupf-Kohler S, Eirich A, Edelmann C, Quaas S, Luthardt RG (2015) Performance of dental impression materials: benchmarking of materials and techniques by three-dimensional analysis. Dent Mater J. doi:10.4012/dmj.2014-197 PubMed Rudolph H, Graf MR, Kuhn K, Rupf-Kohler S, Eirich A, Edelmann C, Quaas S, Luthardt RG (2015) Performance of dental impression materials: benchmarking of materials and techniques by three-dimensional analysis. Dent Mater J. doi:10.​4012/​dmj.​2014-197 PubMed
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Ender A, Mehl A (2013) Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems. Int J Comput Dent 16:11–21PubMed Ender A, Mehl A (2013) Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems. Int J Comput Dent 16:11–21PubMed
44.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim SY et al. (2013) Accuracy of dies captured by an intraoral digital impression system using parallel confocal imaging. Int J Prosthodont 26:161–163CrossRefPubMed Kim SY et al. (2013) Accuracy of dies captured by an intraoral digital impression system using parallel confocal imaging. Int J Prosthodont 26:161–163CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods for obtaining quadrant dental impressions
verfasst von
Andreas Ender
Moritz Zimmermann
Thomas Attin
Albert Mehl
Publikationsdatum
07.11.2015
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Clinical Oral Investigations / Ausgabe 7/2016
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Elektronische ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1641-y

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2016

Clinical Oral Investigations 7/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update Zahnmedizin und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.