A Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Interproximal Space between Dental Stone Model and Digital Model
Objective: To compare dimensional accuracy of interproximal space between dental stone models and digital models.
Materials and methods: Two cylindrical metal master models were divided by interproximal distance at gingival margin into 3 groups; group 1 (0.5 mm), group 2 (1.0 mm) and group 3 (2.0 mm). Master models were scanned with an intraoral digital scanner 10 times/group and then conventional impressions were taken, providing 10 impressions/group. After that, the impressions were scanned with an extraoral digital scanner and poured with dental stone. Interproximal space at gingival margin of master and dental stone models were measured with a digital vernier caliper and feeler gauges, whereas digital models were measured with a 3shape 3D viewer software. Data were calculated for the absolute of error and then analyzed by using Kruskal-wallis test and Mann Whitney U test (p≤0.05).
Results: There were significant differences in dimensional accuracy in group 1 between dental stone and intraoral digital model, but no significant different in group 2 and group 3. Moreover, significant different was found between extraoral digital model and others for all groups.
Conclusions: Within the limitation of this study, dental stone model showed superior dimensional accuracy to digital models for narrow interproximal space. Conversely, extraoral digital model produced the least accurate dimension.
Mistry GS, Borse A, Shetty OK, Tabassum R. Digital impression system-virtually becoming a reality. J Adv Med Dent Scie 2014; 2: 56-63.
Christensen GJ. Will digital impressions eliminate the current problems with conventional impressions. J Am Dent Assoc 2008; 139(6): 761-763.
Thongthammachat S, Moore BK, Barco MT, Hovijitra S, Brown DT, Andres CJ. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 11(2): 98-108.
Valderhaug J, Fløystrand F. Dimensional stability of elastomeric impression materials in custom-made and stock trays. J Prosthet Dent 1984; 52(4): 514-517.
Hung SH, Purk JH, Tira DE, Eick JD. Accuracy of one-step versus two-step putty wash addition silicone impression technique. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 67(5): 583-589.
Ciesco JN, Malone WF, Sandrik JL, Mazur B. Comparison of elastomeric impression materials used in fixed prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1981; 45(1): 89-94.
Morgano SM, Milot P, Ducharme P, Rose L. Ability of various impression materials to produce duplicate dies from successive impressions. J Prosthet Dent 1995; 73(4): 333-340.
Irfan UB, Aslam K, Nadim R. A review on CAD CAM in dentistry. J Prosthet Dent Park 2015; 24(3): 112-116.
Sharma S, Agarwal S, Sharma D, Kumar S, Glodha N. Impression; digital vs conventional: a review. Ann Dent Spec 2014; 2(1): 9-10.
Suttiat K, Rodaree K, Kuekulpitak T, et al. The accuracy of indirect measuring method on dental digital models. CM Dent J 2017; 38(3): 67-76 (in Thai).
Su TS, Sun J. Comparison of repeatability between intraoral digital scanner and extraoral digital scanner: an in-vitro study. J Prosthodont Res 2015; 59(4): 236-242.
Zilberman O, Huggare JV, Parikakis KA. Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models. Angle Orthodontist 2003; 73(3): 301-306.
Jacob HB, Wyatt GD, Buschang PH. Reliability and validity of intraoral and extraoral scanners. Prog Orthod [serial on the internet]. 2015 Oct [cited 2015 Oct 27]; 16(1): [about 6 p.]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC46238...
Muller P, Ender A, Joda T, Katsoulis J. Impact of digital scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the trios pod scanner. Quintessence Int 2016; 47(4): 343-349.
Anh JW, Park JM, Chun Y, Kim MJ. A comparison of the precision of three-dimensional images acquired by 2 digital intraoral scanners: effects of tooth irregularity and scanning direction. Korean J Orthod 2016; 46(1): 3-12.
Lee K. Comparison of two intraoral scanners based on three-dimensional surface analysis. Prog Orthod [serial on the internet]. 2018 Jan [cited 2018 Feb 12]; 19(6): [about 7 p.]. Available from: https://progressinorthodontics.springeropen.com/ar...
Caputi S, Varvara G. Dimensional accuracy of resultant casts made by a monophase, one-step and two-step, and a novel two-step putty/light-body impression technique: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2008; 99(4): 274-281.
Uhm S, Kim J, Jiang H, et al. Evaluation of the accuracy and precision of four intraoral scanners with 70% reduced inlay and four-unit bridge models of international standard. Dent Mater J 2017; 36(1): 27-34.
Tonmuenwai A, editors. Semi-automatic feeler gauge calibration [monograph on the internet]. Thailand: Blue Update Edition 10; 2014 [citted 2014 Jan 7]. Available from: http://tools-article.sumipol.com/semi-automatic-fe...
Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979; 86(2): 420-428.
Stenberg T, Lindgren E, Barsoum Z. Development of an algorithm for quality inspection of welded structures. Proc IMechE Part B: J Engineering Manufacture 2012; 226(6): 1033-1041.
Haralur SB, Toman MS, Al-Shahrani AA, Al-Qarni AA. Accuracy of multiple pour cast from various elastomer impression methods. Int J Dent [serial on internet]. 2016 Oct 8 [cited 2016 Nov 23]: [about 6 p.]. Available from: https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijd/2016/7414737/
Dugal R, Railkar B, Musani S. Comparative evaluation of dimensional accuracy of different polyvinyl siloxane putty-wash impression techniques-in vitro study. J Int Oral Health 2013; 5(5): 85-94.
Rathee S, Eswaran B, Eswaran M, Prabhu R, Geetha K, Krishna G. A comparison of dimensional accuracy of addition silicone of different consistencies with two different spacer designs-in-vitro study. J Clin Diagn Res 2014; 8(7): 38-41.
Freitas C, Zanotti T, Rizzante F, Furuse A, Freitas M. Linear setting expansion of different gypsum products. Rev Sul-bras Odontol 2015; 12(1): 61-67.
Anusavice KJ, Shen C, Rawls HR. Phillips' science of dental materials. 12th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2013: 498-501.
Akhtar Q, Danyal S, Zareen S, Ahmed B, Maqsood M, Azad AA. Clinical evaluation of proximal contact points in fixed prostheses. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2015; 25(9): 702-704.
Logozzo S, Franceschini G, Kilpela A, Caponi M, Governi L, Blois L. A comparative analysis of intraoral 3D digital scanners for restorative dentistry. Int J Med Technol [serial on internet]. 2008 Dec 15 [cited 2011 Jan 21]; 5(1): [about 18 p.]. Available from: http://ispub.com/IJMT/5/1/10082
Park HS, Shah C. Development of high speed and high accuracy 3d dental intraoral scanner. Procedia Eng 2015; 100: 1174-1181.
Berner M. Optical system for a Confocal Microscope [URL of database on the Internet]. Indianapolis (IN): US patent application publication (US). c2010 [updated 2008 Oct 6; cited 2010 Apr 8]. Available from: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20100085636A1/...
Park JM. Comparative analysis on reproducibility among 5 intraoral scanners: sectional analysis according to restoration type and preparation outline form. J Adv Pros 2016; 8: 354-362.
Richert R, Goujart A, Venet L, et al. Intraoral scanner technologies: a review to make a successful impression. J Healthc Eng [serial on internet]. 2017 Jun 19 [cited 2017 Sep 5]: [about 9 p.]. Available from: https://www.hindawi.com/journals/jhe/2017/8427595/.
Rudolph H, Salman H, Kuhn K, Shichwardt V, Wostmann B, Luthardt RG. Accuracy of intraoral and extraoral digital data acquisition for dental restorations. J Appl Oral Sci 2016; 24(1): 85-94.
Jeon JH, Choi BY, Kim CM, Kim JH, Kim HY, Kim WC. Three-dimensional evaluation of the repeatability of scanned conventional impressions of prepared teeth generated with white- and blue-light scanners. J Prosthet Dent 2015; 114(4): 549-553.
Nedelcu RG, Persson AS. Scanning accuracy and precision in 4 intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparison based on 3-dimensional analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112(6): 1461-1471.
www.olympusmicro.com [URL of homepage on the internet]. New York Olympus America Inc. Availble from: http://olympus.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/techniques/co...
Desoutter A, Solieman OY, Subsol G, Tassery H, Cuisinier F, Fages M. Method to evaluate the noise of 3d intra-oral scanner. PLoS One [serial on the internet]. 2017 Jul 13 [cited 2017 Aug 9]: [about 12 p.]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC55499...
Shimizu S, Shinya A, Gomi H. The accuracy of the CAD system using intraoral and extraoral scanners for designing of fixed dental prostheses. Dent Mater J 2017; 36(4): 402-407.
Thongkaramai P, Jaknowan N, Homchen T. Design and construction of 3D scanner. Bachelor of
Mechanical (Engineering). Burapha University, 2015.
Kusnoto B, Evan CA. Reliability of a 3d surface laser scanner for orthodontic applications. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002; 122: 342-348.
Rossini G, Parrini S, Castroflorio T, Deregibus A, Debernardi CL. Diagnostic accuracy and measurement sensitivity of digital models for orthodontic purposes: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016; 149: 161-170.
Hack GD, Patzelt SB. Evaluation of the accuracy of six intraoral scanning devices: an in-vitro investigation. ADA Professional Product Review 2015; 10(4): 1-5.
Wongsuwan H, Chaijareenont P, Yavirach P. A Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Interproximal Space between Dental Stone Model and Digital Model: Original articles. CM Dent J [Internet]. 2019 May 01 [cited 2024 Nov 18];40(2):117-130. Available from: https://www.dent.cmu.ac.th/cmdj/frontend/web/?r=site/viewarticle&id=91
Wongsuwan, H., Chaijareenont, P. & Yavirach, P. (2019). A Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Interproximal Space between Dental Stone Model and Digital Model. CM Dent J, 40(2), 117-130. Retrieved from: https://www.dent.cmu.ac.th/cmdj/frontend/web/?r=site/viewarticle&id=91
Wongsuwan, H., Chaijareenont Pisaisit and Yavirach Piriya . 2019. "A Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Interproximal Space between Dental Stone Model and Digital Model." CM Dent J, 40(2), 117-130. https://www.dent.cmu.ac.th/cmdj/frontend/web/?r=site/viewarticle&id=91
Wongsuwan, H. et al. 2019. 'A Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Interproximal Space between Dental Stone Model and Digital Model', CM Dent J, 40(2), 117-130. Retrieved from https://www.dent.cmu.ac.th/cmdj/frontend/web/?r=site/viewarticle&id=91
Wongsuwan, H., Chaijareenont, P. and Yavirach, P. "A Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Interproximal Space between Dental Stone Model and Digital Model", CM Dent J, vol.40, no. 2, pp. 117-130, May. 2019.
Wongsuwan Hatairat, Chaijareenont Pisaisit, Yavirach Piriya "A Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Interproximal Space between Dental Stone Model and Digital Model." CM Dent J, vol.40, no. 2, May. 2019, pp. 117-130, https://www.dent.cmu.ac.th/cmdj/frontend/web/?r=site/viewarticle&id=91