4种口内扫描仪在不同颊侧扫描范围的咬合接触面积比较  

Comparison of occlusal contact areas of four intraoral scanners in different buccal occlusal scanning ranges

作　　者：王行康 张丽[2] 姜涛[2] WANG Xingkang;ZHANG Li;JIANG Tao(Department of Ophthalmology and Dentistry,Pudong New District Ophthalmology and Dentistry Prevention and Treatment Centre,Shanghai 201399,China;Cosmetic Dentistry,Jinan Stomatological Hospital,Jinan,Shandong 250002,China)

机构地区：[1]浦东新区眼病牙病防治所综合二科,上海201399 [2]济南市口腔医院口腔医学美容中心,山东济南250002

出　　处：《医药前沿》2023年第27期11-16,共6页Journal of Frontiers of Medicine

基　　金：济南市卫建委科技创新发展计划(2019-2-45);济南市科技创新发展计划(202019006)。

摘　　要：目的:通过评价扫描牙列模型的准确度及不同颊侧扫描范围获得的咬合接触面积,探讨4种口内扫描仪扫描牙列模型获取数字化信息的可靠性。方法:采用1种仓扫扫描仪和4种不同的数字化口内扫描仪对标准牙列石膏模型进行全牙列的扫描,按照采用扫描仪的不同分为口外扫描仓组(对照组)和口内扫描仪组(试验组),并将其扫描后获得的数据分别设为TRIOS3组、CEREC组、FREQTY组和FUSSEN组,其中每一组根据颊侧扫描范围的不同又分为TRIOS3(6-3)组、TRIOS3(6-1)组、TRIOS3(6-6)组;CEREC(6-3)组、CEREC(6-1)组、CEREC(6-6)组;FREQTY(6-3)组、FREQTY(6-1)组、FREQTY(6-6)组;FUSSEN(6-3)组、FUSSEN(6-1)组、FUSSEN(6-6)组。应用逆向工程软件的三维配准技术,分析不同扫描仪获取数字化信息的准确度及偏差分析功能显示下颌牙列模型上的咬合接触图像,并测量上下颌间的咬合接触面积。结果:4组口内扫描仪的准确度,除CEREC组和FUSSEN组比较,差异无统计学意义(P=0.61)外,其余各组间比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。TRIOS3(6-3)组、FUSSEN(6-3)组和CEREC(6-3)组获得的咬合面积小于对照组,有统计学差异(P<0.01);FREQTY(6-1)组和(6-6)组获得的咬合面积大于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);其余各组与对照组咬合面积比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。试验组组间分别比较,颊侧扫描范围为单侧第一磨牙到尖牙时,CEREC组、FUSSEN组、FREQTY组与TRIOS3组比较,差异有统计学意义(P=0.08);颊侧扫描范围为单侧第一磨牙到中切牙时,CEREC组、FUSSEN组与TRIOS3组间咬合接触面积比较,差异有统计学意义(P=0.06);FREQTY组分别与TRIOS3组、CEREC组、FUSSEN组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01);颊侧扫描范围为双侧第一磨牙时,CEREC组、FUSSEN组与TRIOS3组比较,差异有统计学意义(P=0.06),FREQTY组分别与TRIOS3组、CEREC组、FUSSEN组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。4种品牌口内扫描�Objective To investigate the reliability of four intraoral scanners in obtaining digital information of dental casts by evaluating the accuracy of scanning dental casts and the occlusal contact area obtained by different buccal scanning ranges.Methods The standard dentition plaster model was scanned by one chamber scanner and four different digital intraoral scanners.According to the different scanners used,the patients were divided into extraoral scan chamber group(control group)and intraoral scanner group(test group).Each group was further divided into TRIOS3(6-3)group,TRIOS3(6-1)group and TRIOS3(6-6)group according to the range of buccal scanning.Group CEREC(6-3),group CEREC(6-1),group CEREC(6-6);FREQTY(6-3)group,FREQTY(6-1)group,FREQTY(6-6)group;Group FUSSEN(6-3),group FUSSEN(6-1)and group FUSSEN(6-6).The accuracy of digital information obtained by different scanners was analyzed by using reverse engineering software.The occlusal contact images on the mandibular dentition models were displayed and the occlusal contact areas between the upper and lower jaws were measured.Results There were significant differences in the accuracy of the four groups of intraoral scanners,and there was no significant difference between the CEREC group and the FUSSEN group(P=0.61),and there were significant differences between the other groups(P<0.01).The occlusal area of the TRIOS3(6-3),FUSSEN(6-3)and CEREC(6-3)groups were significantly smaller than that of the control group(P<0.01).The occlusal area of the FREQTY(6-1)group and the FREQTY(6-6)group were significantly larger than that of the control group(P<0.01).There was no significant difference in occlusal area between the other groups and the control group(P>0.05).There was significant difference between CEREC group,FUSSEN group,FREQTY group and TRIOS3 group when the buccal scanning range was unilateral first molar to canine(P=0.08).When the buccal scanning range was from unilateral first molar to central incisor,there was significant difference in occlusal contact area among

关 键 词：口内扫描仪 数字化印模 咬合接触 颊侧扫描 

分 类 号：R783[医药卫生—口腔医学]