Accuracy of a digital impression system based on active triangulation technology with blue light for implants: Effect of clinically relevant parameters

Implant Dentistry

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 498-504

  Giménez, Beatriz ^a   Özcan, Mutlu ^b   Martínez Rus, Francisco ^a   Pradíes, Guillermo ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Accuracy; Digital impression; Implant angulation; Implant depth; Intraoral scanner

Indexed keywords

TOOTH IMPLANT;

COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; DENTAL IMPRESSION; HUMAN; PROCEDURES; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; REPRODUCIBILITY; TOOTH IMPLANT;

COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; DENTAL IMPLANTS; DENTAL IMPRESSION TECHNIQUE; DENTAL PROSTHESIS DESIGN; HUMANS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 84942241579     PISSN: 10566163     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000283     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Azari A,Nikzad S. Computer-Assisted implantology: Historical background and potential outcomesdA review Int J Med Robot. 2008,4, 95-104.
2. van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater. 2012;28:3-12.
3. Mehl A, Ender A, Mörmann W, et al. Accuracy testing of a new intraoral 3D camera [in German]. Int J Comput Dent. 2009;12:11-28.
4. Lee SJ, Gallucci GO. Digital vs. conventional implant impressions: Efficiency outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 22:111-115.
5. Karl M, Shubinski P, Taylor T. Effect of intraoral scanning on the passivity of fit of implant-supported fixed partial prostheses. Quintessence Int. 2012:43:555-563.
6. Giménez B, Özcan M, Martínez-Rus F, et al. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on active wavefront sampling technology for implants considering operator experience, implant angulation and depth. Clin Implant Dent Rel Res. 2015; 17(suppl 1): e54-e64.
7. Moreno A, Giménez B, Özcan M, et al. A clinical protocol for intraoral digital impression of screw-retained CAD/CAM framework on multiple implants based on wavefront sampling technology. Implant Dent. 2013;22:320-325.
8. Birnbaum NS, Aaronson HB. Dental impressions using 3D digital scanners: Virtual becomes reality. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2008;29:494-505.
9. Syrek A, Reich G, Ranftl D. Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling. J Dent. 2010;38:553-559.
10. Henke l GL. A comparison of fixed prostheses generated from conventional vs digitally scanned dental impressions. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2007;28:422-431.
11. Brawek PK, Wolfart S, Endres L, et al. The clinical accuracy of single crowns exclusively fabricated by digital workflowdThe comparison of two systems. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17:2119-2125.
12. Seelbach P, Brueckel C, W östmann B. Accuracy of digital and conventional impression technique and workflow. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17:1759-1764.
13. Kim SY, Kim MJ, Han JS, et al. Accuracy of dies captured by an intraoral digital impression system using parallel confocal imaging. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26:161-163.
14. Luthardt RG, Loos R, Quaas S. Accuracy of intraoral data acquisition in comparison to the conventional impression [in German]. Int J Comput Dent. 2005;8:283-294.
15. Güth JF, Keul C, Stimmelmayr M, et al. Accuracy of digital models obtained by direct and indirect data capturing. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17:1201-1208.
16. Almeida E, Silva JS, Erdelt K, Edelhoff D, et al. Marginal and internal fit of four-unit zirc onia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18:515-523.
17. Ender A, Melh A. Full arch scans: Conventional versus digital impressionsdAn in-vitro study [in German]. Int J Comput Dent. 2011;14:11-21.
18. van der Meer WJ, Andriessen FS, Wismeijer D, et al. Application of intra-oral dental scanners in the digital workflow of implantology. PLoS One. 2012;7:e43312.
19. Ender A, Mehl A. Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems. Int J Comput Dent. 2013;16:11-21.
20. Giménez B, Özcan M, Martínez-Rus F, et al. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on parallel confocal laser technology for implants with consideration of operator experience and implant angulation and depth. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29:853-862.
21. Giménez B, Pradíes G, Martínez-Rus F, et al. Accuracy of two digital implant impression systems based on confocal microscopy with variations in customiz ed software and clinical parameters. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30:56-64.
22. ISO International Organization for Standardization. 10360-2 2009) geometrical product specifications (GPS). Ac ceptance and re-verification test for coordinated measuring machines (CMMs). Part 2: CMMs used for measuring linear dimensions. Available at http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue-ics/catalogue-detail-ics.htm?ics1= 17&ics2=040&ics3=30& csnumber=40954.
23. Jemt T, Hjalmarsson L. In vitro measurements of precision of fit of implant-supported frameworks. A comparison between " virtual" and "physical" assessments of fit using two different techniques of measurements. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14:175-182.
24. Choi JH, Lim YJ, Yim SH, et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of implant-level impression techniques for internal-connection implant prostheses in parallel and divergent models. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007;22:761-768.
25. Jan HK, Kim S, Shim JS, et al. Accuracy of impressions for internal-connection implant prosthesi s with various divergent angles. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26:1011-1015.
26. Sorrentino R, Gherlone EF, Calesini G, et al. Effect of implant angulation, connection length, and impress ion material on the dimensional accuracy of implant impressions: An in vitro comparative study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2010;12:63-76.
27. Jo SH, Kim S, Shim JS, et al. Effect of impression coping and implant angulation on the accuracy of implant impressions: An in vitro study. J Adv Prosthodont. 2010;2:128-133.